Another brain teaser to test your Elliott wave knowledge:
I have tried to make it a bit easier by violating only core Elliott wave rules and making the mistakes really bad ones. Price points of all waves are given so you can calculate lengths and look for the mistakes.
You can participate by either posting a chart or comment pointing out the five deliberate mistakes, or post a chart where you fix the wave count to remove the mistakes. It’s up to you. If making a comment, please refer to the degree of labelling the mistake is in.
I encourage all members who find this a bit challenging to really give it a go. This should be a great exercise to really hone your Elliott wave skills.
There are two mistakes which violate the same Elliott wave rule.
One mistake is in a corrective structure, and to me it looks very obvious.
Another mistake violates a core Elliott wave rule, but it is a matter of judgement as to how the wave may subdivide on a lower time frame.
Another mistake violates a core Elliott wave rule, probably the most important core Elliott wave rule which should absolutely never be broken, ever.
Answers will be posted tomorrow after tomorrow’s analysis is published. You have 24 hours. Have fun!
Published @ 04:30 a.m. EST.
1. Intermediate (4) of Primary 1 ending at 1217.05 entering the territory of Intermediate (1) of Primary 1 ending at 1218.43.
2. Primary 4 ending at 1260.72 entering the territory of Primary 1 ending at 1263.64
3. Wave 3 can never be the shortest. Intermediate (3) of Primary 3 is shown as the shortest.
4. Minute d of Minor B marked incorrectly, The way it is marked it comes after Minute e. Minute d should be the long wicked spike up.
5. ???? Still working on it !!
I am sorry, I am late. I disqualify myself, on my own. I shall be on time next time. Of all days, I was busy today and had not logged in earlier and when I started working on it I did not see any responses, so I thought it was for tomorrow. When I submit it, I see a ton of responses.
No worries David 🙂
I’ll do another one next week
Thank you Lara. That would be very nice. It is interesting and educative.
1. Primary 4 invades Primary 1 but could be a leading diag?
2. Intermediate 4 in Primary 1 also lower than inter 4 but could that also be an LD?
3. Intermediate 3 in Primary 3 is the shortest wave
4. Minor B in (Y) exceeds minor C in (X) but think this is OK in an expanded flat?
Hi Nick. I agree with your first 3 points.
In your point 4, I think it’s okay for Minor B to exceed Int. (x), and for that matter okay for (X) to exceed Primary 1, but Primary Wave 2 can’t be an expanded flat or regular flat as labeled or from the look of it, because it ends in a 3 (flats are 3,3,5). So it has to be a combo or double zig zag. If it’s a zig zag, it’s a little unusual because it’s not trending enough. So it’s probably a combo. Int. W would have to be a zig zag, then X, then Int. Y would be a flat. However, Int. W doesn’t necessarily look like a 3, although it must be for this to work. It can’t be a 5, and can’t be a double zigzag or combo itself or you would have a combo within a combo. So it needs to be a simple ABC zigzag and not sure it is.
For the fifth mistake, that triangle is all wrong. It’s actually not a triangle as far as i can tell. The end is higher than the beginning, and the lines are not converging or diverging really.
You’ve got 4 out of the 5 mistakes I intended.
The last one could be subject to a check of subdivisions on a lower time frame, but at this time frame it looks all wrong.
Cesar didn’t get this last one either…. but it’s a really important rule violation!
Primary 1 as it is labelled couldn’t be a leading diagonal, the subdivision of (2) is wrong (it’s not a zigzag, it’s a flat) and the wave lengths are wrong ((4) is longer than (2), but (3) is shorter than (1) and (5) is shorter than (3) )
Hi Lara responding here to your question below. I wouldn’t say too easy but maybe it’s not at the ‘difficult’ level that the other one was. But I find these fun to do
is it that other than Int. 3 of Primary 3 being the shortest wave of Primary 3, it also looks very much like a 3 wave structure?
Nice one! All mistakes found.
Was that too easy?