Sage

diver993 wrote: Jackozy, ignore the wave 1 and 2 and it makes sense:) I thought it had a chance of being a 1 and 2 but then saw differently and forgot to change the labels.

I really don't care what label you put on a wave, for me it is the structure of the wave that's important. You can call them wotsits and thingamegigs or whatever. It's not really important. I certainly have no wish to get anal about the rights and wrongs of a label

That rather begs the question: why bother labelling them at all then?

All I'm asking you to do is to explain something that is confusing a lot of people but you seem unable to provide a proper answer. Instead you make insinuations about being "anal" about getting the labelling correct. What's the point in putting up a chart with Elliott Wave labels on it if you're not bothered about getting them right?

Seems rather pointless to me.

Thanks for responding.

Jackozy, ignore the wave 1 and 2 and it makes sense:) I thought it had a chance of being a 1 and 2 but then saw differently and forgot to change the labels.

I really don't care what label you put on a wave, for me it is the structure of the wave that's important. You can call them wotsits and thingamegigs or whatever. It's not really important. I certainly have no wish to get anal about the rights and wrongs of a label

Hi Diver,

On that count, you appear to have had a wave 1 up followed by a wave 2 down - OK so far - but then you've got a 5 wave impulsive move up which ought to be wave 3 or wave 1 of 3 but you've labelled its top as an ((a))? This doesn't make any sense to me. It suggests that the move up from your wave 2 low is a massive corrective move up to a possible ((c)) at the recent 371 high?

How can you have a wave 1 up followed by a 2 down and then another, bigger, correction upwards? Surely the move up from the wave 2 low (which you've initially labelled as impulsive too!) is at least part of a wave 3?

I don't want to re-open old arguments, but I suspect that these counts are confusing a lot of people as they don't conform to EWT (as it was published).

Sorry, keep forgetting to include the link
dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/7238706/SAGE%20GRP..png

Anyone looking at this?

Although I've drawn the fibs on here at the recent high I'm not sure this is now changing course just yet?