RSI Divergences

Broad-rock,

For clarity I have never said this will identify the start or end of waves. What I do say is you cannot have a motive wave without an RSI divergence between the third and fifth waves. This is slightly different in that you can always have an extension to a wave. If it is a motive wave then, of course, you would also have a similar divergence in the extension. It must be so purely from the characteristics of a wave 5: it lacks 'strength' when compared to its counterpart, the wave 3, because the wave is ending. The RSI measures 'strength', hence this is a powerful tool in identifying motive waves from ABC's.
I know many people struggle with EWT, especially the labeling, hence my reason for bringing this to their attention. I don't claim to be 100% in my labeling, far from it, and I know it is impossible to be 100% correct, sometimes until after the wave 3 completes, as waves 2 and B waves can retrace to similar percentages. But, it's the RSI divergence which gives the game away and identifies the five-way wave as motive. Jackozy disagrees. Fine. But he already has his method. I brought this subject up to assist those who would like to learn but are struggling with the complexities not for those with closed minds stuck in 1938 sorry....couldn't resist the pop!
Might I suggest those interested folk take a dispassionate look back over their favourite charts and just see if they can see what it is I've been rattling on about.
That's all from me on the subject and apologies if this thread has caused any upset.

Hi B-r

I don't have any problem debating anything but there seems little to be gained by trying to have a discussion with someone who responds with "You think I'm wrong but I know you're wrong".

Question: if RSI was invented in 1978 and is probably the most widely used indicator, why has nobody else ever noticed that you can use divergences in it to guarantee a wave 5 top 100% of the time? The answer is simple: you can't. It happens a lot but not 100% of the time. I'm pretty sure Prechter might have noticed.

I have backtested it myself extensively. In fact, you can't even rely on an RSI divergence as a trend change pattern all that well.

I don't mind if diver wants to have his own wave theory, but Elliott's it ain't.

Sorry Jackozy and Diver but you just cant leave this thread like this, far too much good debate going on, calm down and lets see what we got so far.

Diver has identified what EWT really needed (IMO), a method or rules to start and end waves, ok so it was not available to Elliot and is not every-ones answer. But EWT needs to be less subjective.

Jackozy - I understand the question, How does the Dow correct to new highs ? in the same direction as the trend, Wave B of an expanded flat ?

Yes, let's.

Remo, Ronnie et al, my apologies for having been drawn into this. There's simply no helping some people.

The fact is they do backtest 100% if you label correctly.
You think I'm wrong and I know you're wrong, so let's agree to differ and leave it there:)

"My point was, and is, had the RSI been in existence I'm 100% certain Mr Elliott would have made it a rule."

But that's pure supposition diver. And given his almost OCD-like meticulousness and the fact that RSI divergences don't backtest 100% of the time I doubt he would have.

What you've just shown there IS a 5 wave move - it's the 5th wave up from 03/09 lows. However, you've got that whole 5 wave move as an ab-abc move. That's not part of EWT. Even then, the first subwave up of the sequence you've highlighted (which isn't the one I was referring to) only retraces 38.2% so by your earlier argument can't be a subwave 2 but that's exactly what you're saying it is.

Still, each to their own. As long as it's working for you mate...