Loading ...GDX Still undecided …
I was expecting a new high after the FOMC.
The bullish case is still valid as long as 25.17 holds with the Expanded Flat correction
The bearish case implies that MAYBE, we’re making a triangle for (b) wave and we have another leg down for the (c) wave (Zig-Zag).
In your camp on the tri and C leg down.
Not sure about P1 and P2 yet.
Giving them the benefit of the doubt, for now.
If i remember your EW chart correctly, you are expecting that gold will go
below 1000$ …
We can probably compare this scenario with the one of Harry Dent with gold at 700$ in a deflation case.
I don’t really believe in counts above Primary and intermediate degrees for EW.
I am curious to know if you still believe that we will go below 1000$ …
Gabe –
I really like your EW charts!
What’s your thoughts on Silver?
Have we completed P2 with an a-b-c correction or is there further downside risk?
Warning: digression on to using polynomial regression, discussed recently, I think w/ your last or 2nd to last post:
One sort of thing I used to do w/ my statistical software to define trends in a way to keep my subjectivity out of it. W/ respect to your 1st chart, I’d check every day from your point (b) onwards which polynomial line had the fit w/ the highest statistical significance. For many days from (b), obviously, it would be statistically significant, linear, downwards. After around Sept. 7, after prices rise, there might be no significant polynomial at the level of significance I chose (including the linear one), or it might come to fit a parabolic or cubic curve or higher order curve best, with the last leg of the curve going upwards. Then I had my methodology to determine whether to count that upwards bit as a new trend, a positive trend.
I played with many things, but using significance of fit as an arbitrary, objective, and reproducible (if not perhaps rigorously justifiable) means of determining trend. In objectively identifying trends I could simultaneously identify the points where they started. My methodology might be open to reasonable criticism, but at least it was reproducible and not subjective. (Previously I have noted that I would also log how many standard deviations the last data point did or did not fall from this or that linear or higher order line–that was something else I did–and more.)
I did this after every day’s data for years in the 1990s for a gold stock index and other stuff. I did not rigorously verify the value of any of my methodologies. Looking for curvy lines that statistically fit data did however get me started looking for snakes and sea monsters on eyeballing charts, however, as I’ve previously noted. W/ this particular chart, mental imagery doesn’t help me too much. I suppress the urge to see a camel (don’t know what to do with that–I guess a double peak), and instead go with a serpent. Looks as if the serpent may have a tendency to be wanting to go upwards since june. But now? It is eyeing what’s above after being hesitant and sneaky (sneaky maybe so as not to get overexposed) and seems to want to leap up, but I can’t rule out that it wants to dive–could just slither along around its current level–so not very useful, or at least my psychic herpetological skills are too limited. Not a good example for the sea monster/snake methodology if you want a definitive answer. I certainly haven’t verified the methodology of looking for serpents and trying to think what they’re up to! Just responding in far more than probably desired detail what I used to do w/ polynomial curves, now that the memories freshen.