This is Tartan's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Tartan's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Recent Activity
Manish, I sent to document to your email Cheers
Taz, Regarding your question on learning NeoWave: I recently started learning NeoWave and had the same questions as yourself. I think it was helpful that I had a solid understanding of Elliott Wave - having read Pretcher's "Elliott Wave Principle" and having used it in practice for about a year. I then read Neely's "Mastering Elliott Wave". In hindsight, I got bogged down in chapter 3 and recommend that you only spend about an hour skimming the Rules portion of this chapter after page 3-22. Then, move on to chapter 4 and beyond. Come back to chapter 3 after you have read the entire book. Neely also recommends skimming the Rules sections of chapter 3, but I am stubborn that way - sometimes to my detriment. As DG mentions, it is also important to read the questions of the day and various PDF documents on - this is where you will learn about Neely's newer patterns. I found this content to be poorly organized on the web site, so I copied it all into a Word document and categorized it into sections. I refer to this document very frequently. If you want a copy of this Word document, then shoot me an email (tartan31 at gmail dot com) and I will send it to you. I subscribe to each of Neely's trading newsletters. Maybe you just want to start off with the S&P newsletter. I chart each day's action in Excel according to Neely's charting recommendations and have written Excel worksheets to interpret the chapter 3 Retracement rules. But I have not been able to develop an Excel worksheet to automate the Pre-Constructive Rules of Logic - it gets VERY complicated and time consuming. Consequently, I don't use the Rules very often in my analyses - I will likely do so in the future when I get a bit more experience. Many of the rules are actually reflected in the content of the other chapters, so in actuality I am applying the rules when I apply the logic of the other chapters. I would recommend that you do not try and automate the rules as I did – my time would have been better spent re-reading the other chapters. A key difference between Elliott Wave and NeoWave is the use of time in the analysis – time is very important. I do not find that Mastering Elliott Wave or the content on the web site provides enough detail and explanation regarding the use of time. Pay very close attention to the small amount of content that there is on time. Time is embedded within the Pre-Constructive Rules of Logic – but again this section is a very challenging read. I find the comments in Yelnick's and DG's blogs to be extremely helpful and I am a regular reader of both. Good luck!
DG, My email is tartan31 at gmail dot com
DG, Congratulations on your new blog! I definately would like to participate. As you know, I subscribe to all four of Neely's trading services. I selected "subscribe" on your blog and am eagerly awaiting an invite :-)
DG: Hmmm. In this quote from Neely, it says if "the move afterward is slower than the previous move in the same direction, you are starting your count from the wrong place". I have interpreted this to mean that the first monowave of a new trend must be faster than any monowave in the same direction during the prevous multiwave. Do you think that my interpretation is correct?
Toggle Commented Jun 3, 2009 on Tracking the Final Surge at Planet Yelnick
DG, Thanks a lot for this advice. Can I ask you to double check the time calculations in these two options? In the first option, I see that the 904.78 time was hit at 2:54pm EST on Fri May 29 and the 949.38 price was hit at 10:01am on Tues June 2. This translates to 489 minutes. Adding 489 minutes to 10:01am on June 2 gets me to 11:40am on Wed June 3. Your calculation says 1:41pm (2 hours difference). The second option mentions that 61.8% of the retrace is 339 minutes – meaning that 100% of the retrace is 549 minutes. As stated above, the retrace is 489 minutes according to my calculations (1 hour difference). No big deal as I understand the points your are making in these two options. But if in fact you have miscounted then I did not want you to trade based upon this miscount.
Toggle Commented Jun 3, 2009 on Tracking the Final Surge at Planet Yelnick
EN, What was your thinking behind the 1020 stop? Is is just a stop that feels sufficiently high that it will likely not be hit?
Toggle Commented Jun 3, 2009 on Tracking the Final Surge at Planet Yelnick
The way I understand NeoWave, is that we need to enter short when we achieve a bigger and faster selloff than anything selloff we have seen since March 6. The fastest selloff since March 6 was between April 17 at 3:44pm (S&P=875.72) and April 21 at 9:30am (S&P=825.5). This translates to a 50.22 point selloff in 406 minutes. Is this the way others understand NeoWave? Is there a better NeoWave strategy that does not involve giving up 50 points?
Toggle Commented Jun 2, 2009 on Tracking the Final Surge at Planet Yelnick
DG, Can you help me understand the requirement to have this current downturn "beat" the April 17-21 downturn? As I understand it, the April 17-21 downturn was the initial section of wave d of the diametric that you called. I probably should be able to figure this out myself by looking through the MEW book or Neely's questions of the week. By the way, I have read your May 14 post that explains this diametric many times over. That was a tremendously helpful post in helping me to get my head around diametric formations. I have actually printed it out and placed it in my NeoWave binder for future reference.
Toggle Commented May 21, 2009 on Vexed by the VIX at Planet Yelnick
DG, I decided to act on this buy. I told myself that I would act on all recommendations when I subscribed - so I will take the wins with the losses. But, I do think that there is a good chance that he is wrong here.
Toggle Commented May 18, 2009 on Neely Alert - Final Rally Spurt! at Planet Yelnick
Is anyone acting upon Neely's emergency update buy from last week? We are now at his recommended entry level.
Toggle Commented May 18, 2009 on Neely Alert - Final Rally Spurt! at Planet Yelnick
DG: Great post! I really like how you factor in time to your analysis. Question for you - my understanding of a neutral triangle is that wave C is larger than A or E in terms of percentage gain. On the S&P (I don't use SPY), if wave A was 672.8 to 823.7 (22.4% increase) and wave C started at 783.11, then we would expect wave C to rise to at least 958.78 (22.4%). Would this movement from the March lows be a contracting triangle if we have already seen this highs at wave-e of the diametric?
Toggle Commented May 15, 2009 on Yves Alert - Rally Over! at Planet Yelnick
The lows of Mar 30, Apr 1, Apr 21 and May 14 line up in a perfect trend line when viewed on a logarithmic chart. And when I say perfect, I mean PERFECT. A break of today's opening low (and therefore the upward sloping trend line) would likely mean a quick and perhaps deep plunge in prices. Alternatively, if today's lows hold then we could then be on our way to Neely's 950+ projection. In either case, does anyone foresee us penetrating this lower trend line by just a few points to hit today's Emergency update buy price of 876 and then continue with a resumption of the uptrend? Perhaps the time for this opportunity has passed? It feels like the trend line is either respected or gets deeply penetrated. To complicate matters further, I am not so sure that today's rally in the S&P was violent enough to be the start of the final leg up that Neely has been looking for. Thoughts?
Toggle Commented May 15, 2009 on Yves Alert - Rally Over! at Planet Yelnick
DG / Vipul, Thanks for the input. It's very helpful to get feedback on my wave counts as I transition from using Elliott Wave to Neo Wave analysis.
Using NeoWave principles, I have been counting the waves within the final E wave of the large expanding triangle that has been going on since last October. The E Wave itself started on March 6. Please check out this URL for a plot of my count: I would very much appreciate any constructive input that anyone can provide with regard to this interpretation. I really struggled with the placement of wave b of (C) within this count. I settled on the April 23rd low since I feel that the acceleration out of this low was faster than the potential alternative placements of wave b. How do people feel about my interpretation of an (A) (B) (C) wave with wave (C) being a contracting triangle with reverse alternation. What alternative counts do others see?
DG: Would you be able to give me brief tutorial on today's Neowave trading report. Neely's assessment is that Based on Fibonacci relationships, wave-E is likely to rally +40% off this year’s low. Do you know how this +40% was derived? I know that wave-E must be the largest in an expanding triangle, but can't figure out how he got +40%. Is it simply that this is an estimated number that gets wave-E to be larger than wave-D (the next largest wave)? Also, I believe that wave-E in an expanding triangle must be the longest in time. I am not sure if this is a rule or a guideline. At any rate, wave-E is the same time length as wave-D (the next longest wave) on May 7 - ie tomorrow.
Toggle Commented May 6, 2009 on Investment Roadmap For Yasi at Planet Yelnick
KRG / Wavist / DG: Thanks for your feedback on the NeoWave Gold, Euro and T-Bill Newsletters. I now have a short term subscription to each of them. In looking through the history, one thing that strikes me is that Neely rarely labels a wave as impulsive. For instance, the movement in Gold since 2005 is labelled as an expanding triangle. I am still sorting out in my mind how a corrective move such as this triangle can result in such explosive moves to never seen before highs. Perhaps I need to see an even longer term chart to better understand this labelling. It is not that I don't understand how this can occur, it is just that everything seems to be in a constant state or correction - even as dramatic new highs are being reached. Perhaps this is just a sign of how messed up our economy has become!
I currently subscribe to Neely's S&P Trading Newsletter. I am thinking of also subscribing to his Euro, T-Bill and Gold Trading Services. I am sure that other's here subscribe to all four services. How have his calls been on Euros, T-Bills and Gold? On the S&P service (to which I currently subscribe), Neely has gained more points over the past year on weekly trades relative to daily and hourly trades. But in entering each trade, I am constrained by the total dollar risk that I am willing to take. Daily trades often (ususally) have a much smaller number of points being risked. The net result is that I can enter into a larger number of S&P contracts with the same total dollar risk on hourly trades than I can on weekly trades. All this to say - my sense is that Neely has gained more points per point risked on hourly trades relative to daily or weekly trades. If so, then in my mind his hourly trades have been more successful. I have not actually done the tracking to be sure, so I thought that I would ask if anyone ever looked at Neely's results in this way?