search elliott


  • Google
Share/Bookmark

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

FlagCounter

  • Where From?
    free counters
Related Posts with Thumbnails

« Today Was Everyone Going From Port to Starboard at the Same Time | Main | First Thing We Do, We Kill All the 'Bots »

Friday, May 07, 2010

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

DG

"If you were actually aware of how the S&P 500 was calculated, you would have never mentioned that PG and MMM were only 1-2% of the index. But you did, and everyone here reading this can see just how naive and ignorant your reply was."

1-2% of the number of stocks in the index.

Again, it's irrelevant. Whether you want to agree with that or not is your own decision. I don't care.

Your link simply proves my point by factually (rather than in the hyperventilating style you are posting about it) that the largest constituent of the index accounts for 3% of the value. Friggin' yawn in the big scheme of things.

% Weight Largest Constituent 3.00%

So, my bottom line is: don't care. Feel free to have a heart attack over it, though.

DG's Dad


"All I know is that the real-time trade calls you've made have been pretty crappy, so it's not as if I'm blown away by your ability to translate your knowledge of ISO's into something of trading value."

As for trading off that Thursday pattern, I said just before the dump:

"Any .99 SPY point rally that takes less than 28 minutes is a buy."

(Posted by: DG | Thursday, May 06, 2010 at 11:44 AM)


Sorry my Son, but as much as you want to "pound your chest" and let everyone here know how BRILLIANT you are with your trading calls, I noticed the following post that you made (quoted below) in which you were looking to get LONG.

Your post was not only made at 11:28AM when the SPY was trading at 1113.74... but also just minutes before an 87 POINT COLLAPSE in the S&P. For some reason, you conveniently ignore this.

And for some reason, your twisted sense of reality has convinced you that you have the ability to interpret Elliott Wave in a precise and accurate manner, yet you clearly did not do so when it came to foreshadowing an 87 point collapse in the S&P just a few minutes later . . .

"Above 113.96 SPY is a long trade with a stop at 109."

(Posted by: DG | Thursday, May 06, 2010 at 11:28 AM)


Son, I really wish you would stop fooling with all of your egotistical blather about your stock market "calls" on these blogs. Your Mother and I would much rather prefer that you'd hit the books at school. After all, we are paying for your tuition.


Posted by: DG's Dad |

DG

Funny that this irritant keeps asking about a couple of stocks and wave analysis, since Neely already addressed exactly how deep this sort of rabbit-hole can go if you get consumed in this line of questioning, in an online chat in August, 2000:

"How does an ew analysis of the Dow take into account the fact that the index seems to be *adjusted* every few years, taking out the non-performers or old fashioned issues and inserting others more likely to do well? What I'm getting at is that it seems you're not measuring the same thing from one year to the next, no?"

"Specifically because of those adjustments, I DON’T follow the DOW - I follow the S&P. I don’t really worry about how the indexes are constructed - men who know MUCH more about that side of the business are busy trying to create accurate reflections of financial reality - I just follow the indexes. IF you worried about that, then you might as well worry about the individual pricing of EVERY stock, then the actual accounting practices of each company - there is a point you just have to TRUST that those who help run the system KNOW what they are doing - I just then follow the psychology associated with the markets ebb and flow"

So, let the bean counters of the world worry about whether or not a large drop in a 3% cap-weighted component of the index shaved 1% off the cash print at the low on Thursday. I've got better things to do with my time. The FACT of it is that anything more than an 80% but less than a 100% retracement, inclusive, of the February-April rally has the same implications from a wave structure perspective.

Of course, if this irritant actually understood wave theory, it would already understand that point and wouldn't bring up irrelevancies.

marketman

Ooops!
Looks like DG got busted ...looking UP just before the market collapsed.

Michael's Post-Op Tranny Mother

"Your post was not only made at 11:28AM when the SPY was trading at 1113.74... but also just minutes before an 87 POINT COLLAPSE in the S&P. For some reason, you conveniently ignore this."

Michael, don't forget that you didn't post anything during that time period except that you thought we'd have a "big run into the close". That was so off, that even a post-op tranny like me, your mother, could see that.

Now get off this website and call me for Mother's Day, you ungrateful adopted little turd!

DG

Ooops!
Looks like DG got busted ...looking UP just before the market collapsed.

Looks like "marketman" never heard of this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corresponding_conditional_%28logic%29

When I posted that 113.96 was .99 above the current price. When price started dropping like a rock, there was no point in continually updating the entry price, so I just stated the logic, i.e. .99 SPY rally in less than 28 minutes.

Thanks for playing, though. Now back into the storage chest with all the other sock puppets.

yelnick


RE: [Planet Yelnick] Steven_737 submitted a comment to "Hold the Optimism"


Steven_737, very interesting smoking gun. In the Era of Entitlement, we might see this pushed under the rug rather than made a cause celebe.

Devil Uncle

DG only post his good call.... what a surprise! And he has never admitted any bad market call... He is always perfect!

Such a perfect hypocritical soul, I'd like to take that send it to hell.

DG

DG only post his good call.... what a surprise! And he has never admitted any bad market call... He is always perfect!

Not true. I've posted set-ups that haven't worked out in the past and since I usually post the stop loss it's obvious when one doesn't work, as well as posting summaries of my win/loss record, showing that ~40% of my trades turn out to be losing trades.

I never have nor will ever claim to be perfect. In fact, one of the things I consistently point out is that trading is always a game of probability, not a game of certainty.

Account Deleted

DG Yelnick !!

It seems the Triangle count has gone awry.Now what other alternatives can we look at.


Regards
VB

DG

VB,

If you mean the Triangle Neely was looking at for wave-B, I'm not sure why you'd say it was gone awry. Stretching its limits, yes, but still within the necessary parameters. Wave-b of a Contracting Triangle can be larger than wave-a.

Account Deleted

DG !!

I am not talking about the Triangle mentioned by NEELY.I was referring to Triangle mentioned here in the post by Yelnick.The Intraday one.


Regards
VB

The comments to this entry are closed.