- Posts: 634
- Thank you received: 0
DOW
Less
More
12 years 8 months ago #6404
by WaveSurfer
Replied by WaveSurfer on topic DOW
updated as per Spx thread...
channel continues...
dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/40497882/dow_channel_may29v1.JPG
cheers WS
channel continues...
dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/40497882/dow_channel_may29v1.JPG
cheers WS
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Less
More
- Posts: 634
- Thank you received: 0
12 years 9 months ago #6342
by WaveSurfer
Replied by WaveSurfer on topic DOW
Fibonacci is great isn't it....numbers are hotter
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
12 years 9 months ago #6339
by Jackozy
Yes, exactly. Thanks remo.
To put it another way: Height of wave 1 + wave 2 low = 14089 in this case.
To put it another way: Height of wave 1 + wave 2 low = 14089 in this case.
The following user(s) said Thank You: WaveSurfer
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
12 years 9 months ago - 12 years 9 months ago #6338
by remo
ill try and explain it
say for example you had 3 waves. 1,2,and 3.
the 100% is basically the height of wave 1 projected from the bottom of wave 2 giving a target for wave 3. so wave 3 minimum is expected to move 100% from the bottom of wave 2.
The 100% was placed automatically from the software.
thats how you project a fib. in the simplest form.
jonamacg83 wrote: Hi Jackozy, that is great thanks, the only bit I do not understand is why the 100% was placed at 14089?
ill try and explain it
say for example you had 3 waves. 1,2,and 3.
the 100% is basically the height of wave 1 projected from the bottom of wave 2 giving a target for wave 3. so wave 3 minimum is expected to move 100% from the bottom of wave 2.
The 100% was placed automatically from the software.
thats how you project a fib. in the simplest form.
Last edit: 12 years 9 months ago by remo.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Less
More
- Posts: 49
- Thank you received: 0
12 years 9 months ago #6334
by jonamacg83
Replied by jonamacg83 on topic DOW
Hi Jackozy, that is great thanks, the only bit I do not understand is why the 100% was placed at 14089?
The following user(s) said Thank You: MRA4
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
12 years 9 months ago #6328
by Jackozy
Hi jonamacg83,
The Fib positions are determined by the placement of the 0% level, not the 100% level. They're extensions of the 4 June 2012 to 5 Oct 2012 move, not retracements. They're used to see where possible resistances will be whereas retracement Fibs are used to look for supports.
If you don't have a Fib extension tool then use the retracement one but do it upside down from, in this case, 5 Oct 2012 down to 4 June 2012 and then move the whole Fib sequence to the Nov 2012 low and you should get the same result.
Hope that helps.
jonamacg83 wrote: Great chart and very insightful - the only question I have is why did you put the 100% mark where you have?
Hi jonamacg83,
The Fib positions are determined by the placement of the 0% level, not the 100% level. They're extensions of the 4 June 2012 to 5 Oct 2012 move, not retracements. They're used to see where possible resistances will be whereas retracement Fibs are used to look for supports.
If you don't have a Fib extension tool then use the retracement one but do it upside down from, in this case, 5 Oct 2012 down to 4 June 2012 and then move the whole Fib sequence to the Nov 2012 low and you should get the same result.
Hope that helps.
The following user(s) said Thank You: jonamacg83
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Moderators: remo
Time to create page: 0.152 seconds
