Captain Jack » Thu Oct 29, 2015 5:30 pm wrote:

Lowphat » Thu Oct 29, 2015 1:11 pm wrote: http://www.stevehopwoodforex.com/phpBB3 ... ck#p129188
it basically the same but heed the advice of the others to get the cycle down first.

one of my fav pic's
EW was published in 1938 i think so the pattern has been around for a good awhile

if your in a down cycle sometimes the HOD is a good place to enter but i think that has been said many times before.
there are many instruments to choose from. eliminate all but the clearest one/s where you know for sure where your at in the cycle.
having said all this i still need a lot more chart time to become proficient.

The waves do not create price, price created those wave...it is the price cycle...

Much easier....

-CJ-

[url=http://www.stevehopwoodforex.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?p=129675#p129675]IanN » Thu Oct 29, 2015 8:14 pm[/url] wrote:
Finally, I found a comment you made on September 30th (in my PDF) about looking at higher timeframes to clarify a count. I did that on this pair - moved to H4 and it is blindingly obvious.

Another lesson delivered from a master teacher. Thanks CJ

Regards

Ian N.

Captain Jack » Thu Oct 29, 2015 12:30 pm wrote:
The waves do not create price, price created those wave...it is the price cycle...

Much easier....

-CJ-

IanN » Thu Oct 29, 2015 12:14 pm wrote:

Captain Jack » Thu Oct 29, 2015 5:15 pm wrote:
Sorry Ian and I'm not singling you out, but I'm tired of being asked the same question, repeating the same answer and then seeing the same question again. So I'm going to ask the question this time.

Why this pair from you and the all the others who have thrown the same chart up? Why this pair??

-CJ-

CJ,

No problem with your answer, I really appreciate your time. The reason I asked the question was because I keep getting fooled by what I am absolutely sure is the end of L3 and then it drops another push.

In answer to your question, no reason for this pair. It just happened to be the latest occurrence of this mistake that I need to eradicate to become a better trader.

I've been through this whole thread twice now and on the second time through I made a load of additions to the original PDF to personalise it for what I think is important. I totally agree with comments made by WhoKnows earlier.

Finally, I found a comment you made on September 30th (in my PDF) about looking at higher timeframes to clarify a count. I did that on this pair - moved to H4 and it is blindingly obvious.

Another lesson delivered from a master teacher. Thanks CJ

Regards

Ian N.

Captain Jack » Thu Oct 29, 2015 2:51 pm wrote:

sympathy » Thu Oct 29, 2015 8:23 am wrote:Hey zumzum, here is the correct level for GA. you counted stophunt as levels.

And what are the levels comprised of?? It's all the same....

-CJ-

PogMeme » Thu Oct 29, 2015 8:31 pm wrote: Care to share the PDF or at least that portion of it?
Thanks

Captain Jack » Thu Oct 29, 2015 12:12 pm wrote:
Our "realities" are illusions. They are things we create that in essence, can and do distort our senses and perceptions. The stronger our beliefs are, the more conviction and certainty that we have towards those beliefs, the stronger the perceptions we experience. Illusions are real because they affect us. We can sense them and we can experience them, therefore they are real. When you cant sense or experience something, then it can't be real. Some of the illusions of our reality, if we let them, are created not by us, but by being convinced by others that their illusion is real.

PogMeme » Thu Oct 29, 2015 2:31 pm wrote: Care to share the PDF or at least that portion of it?
Thanks