MoneyTec Traders Community Forum - View Single Post

vsampier · 08-07-2007, 19:43

"Mr. Gann, Mr. Elliott and Mr. James Bond 007
at a Cocktail Party"

It is clear that both Mr. Gann and Mr. Elliott understood
the natural laws of motion and rotation that describe the
cycles of financial markets, although be it from slightly
different points of view. Neither one of these two gentelmen's
approaches or tools are neither better nor worse than the other
gentleman's approach. They both were talking about the same things.

Based upon my research, I have a personal observation on how
Elliott Wave analysis compares to the technique of using
Exchange Points, Epochs, Time and Market Time that I have described.

Elliotticians understand very well the concept that market cycles
repeat in fixed units. They usually refer to these units as
either Impulsive 5-Wave Structures or 3-Wave Corrective Structures,
with a couple of related variations thrown in.

Many times, Elliott Wave Analysis will will end up generating
multiple Alternate Wave Counts. This usually happens when it appears
that the either a 5-Wave or 3-Wave Structure has completed, however
the current trends still continue, forcing a re-evaluation and re-numbering
of Waves within the structure.

Other times, Elliott Wave Analysis will be impressively spot on the mark.

In Elliott Wave as well as my apporoach to analysis, we are seeking to
map the rotational Price Action Motion to some 'Landmarks', so that we
can somehow gauge the progress of this rotational motion, in order
to project when the next change will happen.

Elliott uses the 5 or 3 Wave *Price-Action* itself as it's 'Landmark' units.

Mr. Gann's and my approach, on the other hand use certain *Time Demarcations* as our 'Landmark' units, to measure by.

Sometimes an Impulsive Trend may continue even though 5 Waves have completed.

What this means is that if you are using the Price Action itself (5 and 3 Waves), as your 'Landmark' measuring units, and the cycle that you happen to be in generates more (or less) than 5 or 3 Waves, then you will most likely get a bit 'lost' in your Wave Count bearings.

However, by using Time Demarcations (Market Time), as your measuring 'Landmark' units, you are not relying on a fixed set of *Price ACtion* Waves to determine your cycle boundaries.

Now don't get me wrong, I think that Elliott Analysis can be deadly accurate at times- these are just some of the differences that I observe.

Now let's join that cocktail party, shall we...

Certainly Mr. Gann and Mr. Elliott knew that markets moved in a Spiraling, Rotational fashion, somewhat like a Vortex or Torus Structure.

After spending the evening drinking Martini's with Mr. Gann and Mr. Elliott, we
should not be surprised to hear Mr. James Bond 007 order his last Martini with
"Stirred, Not Shaken".

08-07-2007, 19:43	#24
vsampier level 1 Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 18 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0 Rep Power: 0	Re: Trend Reversal Prediction "Mr. Gann, Mr. Elliott and Mr. James Bond 007 at a Cocktail Party" It is clear that both Mr. Gann and Mr. Elliott understood the natural laws of motion and rotation that describe the cycles of financial markets, although be it from slightly different points of view. Neither one of these two gentelmen's approaches or tools are neither better nor worse than the other gentleman's approach. They both were talking about the same things. Based upon my research, I have a personal observation on how Elliott Wave analysis compares to the technique of using Exchange Points, Epochs, Time and Market Time that I have described. Elliotticians understand very well the concept that market cycles repeat in fixed units. They usually refer to these units as either Impulsive 5-Wave Structures or 3-Wave Corrective Structures, with a couple of related variations thrown in. Many times, Elliott Wave Analysis will will end up generating multiple Alternate Wave Counts. This usually happens when it appears that the either a 5-Wave or 3-Wave Structure has completed, however the current trends still continue, forcing a re-evaluation and re-numbering of Waves within the structure. Other times, Elliott Wave Analysis will be impressively spot on the mark. In Elliott Wave as well as my apporoach to analysis, we are seeking to map the rotational Price Action Motion to some 'Landmarks', so that we can somehow gauge the progress of this rotational motion, in order to project when the next change will happen. Elliott uses the 5 or 3 Wave Price-Action itself as it's 'Landmark' units. Mr. Gann's and my approach, on the other hand use certain Time Demarcations as our 'Landmark' units, to measure by. Sometimes an Impulsive Trend may continue even though 5 Waves have completed. What this means is that if you are using the Price Action itself (5 and 3 Waves), as your 'Landmark' measuring units, and the cycle that you happen to be in generates more (or less) than 5 or 3 Waves, then you will most likely get a bit 'lost' in your Wave Count bearings. However, by using Time Demarcations (Market Time), as your measuring 'Landmark' units, you are not relying on a fixed set of Price ACtion Waves to determine your cycle boundaries. Now don't get me wrong, I think that Elliott Analysis can be deadly accurate at times- these are just some of the differences that I observe. Now let's join that cocktail party, shall we... Certainly Mr. Gann and Mr. Elliott knew that markets moved in a Spiraling, Rotational fashion, somewhat like a Vortex or Torus Structure. After spending the evening drinking Martini's with Mr. Gann and Mr. Elliott, we should not be surprised to hear Mr. James Bond 007 order his last Martini with "Stirred, Not Shaken".