Gathering courage (and info) to label GBP/USD

[joe]

Hi Tom

First off I want to thank you for sharing your discovery.

After my 6th read through, I'm still finding each read deepens my understanding. And while I'm still working on getting my mind around it, I think that the only way to really get that knowledge is by attempting to apply the rule to a chart myself.

And I figured what better chart to start with than the GBP/USD you generously provided as a bench mark.

Before I get into that, I was wondering if you'd provide some insights to help me not get too far off track before I start.

Here are some questions I have that I'm hoping you'll be able to provide some guidance with.

1. For the GBP/USD chart, what depth of data did you use to for ultimately labeling that chart? In other words, what timeframe did you have to drill down to to construct this chart?

2. Where did you get that data? Even with just daily data I only get back to 2001. And hourly data onwards is much shorter at 2009. Without being able to get the data, assumptions need to be made.

3. For beginning your labeling of that chart, what timeframe did you start on? And where did you choose to begin your labeling. It would seem to make sense to me to attempt to begin a labeling by looking for a high degree 5 or C wave, and use that to calibrate the rest of the labeling, but that is a guess.

4. As per the new rule and how it affects the old rules.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, if extensions are no longer needed under NEWR, does that mean that labeling impulse moves I-II-1-2-3-4-5III-IV-V is no longer a practice? Or am I misinterpreting extensions. Does my attached image have the correct understanding as to why extensions are eliminated with RTB?

5. If extensions as I understand it from #3 is correct, and they are no longer used, then it may happen what happens to 5 wave moves with 4 overlapping wave 1? From my own limited EW labeling, it seems that more often than not, wave 3 is usually "too short" without applying a I-II-1-2 type count.

Thanks again for your time and generosity.

Joe

[TS Hennessy]

(02-14-2010 10:47 AM)joe Wrote:  Hi Tom

First off I want to thank you for sharing your discovery.

After my 6th read through, I'm still finding each read deepens my understanding. And while I'm still working on getting my mind around it, I think that the only way to really get that knowledge is by attempting to apply the rule to a chart myself.

And I figured what better chart to start with than the GBP/USD you generously provided as a bench mark.

Before I get into that, I was wondering if you'd provide some insights to help me not get too far off track before I start.

Here are some questions I have that I'm hoping you'll be able to provide some guidance with.

1. For the GBP/USD chart, what depth of data did you use to for ultimately labeling that chart? In other words, what timeframe did you have to drill down to to construct this chart?

Weekly

Quote:2. Where did you get that data? Even with just daily data I only get back to 2001. And hourly data onwards is much shorter at 2009. Without being able to get the data, assumptions need to be made.

Metatrader

Quote:3. For beginning your labeling of that chart, what timeframe did you start on? And where did you choose to begin your labeling. It would seem to make sense to me to attempt to begin a labeling by looking for a high degree 5 or C wave, and use that to calibrate the rest of the labeling, but that is a guess.

Weekly

Quote:4. As per the new rule and how it affects the old rules.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, if extensions are no longer needed under NEWR, does that mean that labeling impulse moves I-II-1-2-3-4-5III-IV-V is no longer a practice? Or am I misinterpreting extensions. Does my attached image have the correct understanding as to why extensions are eliminated with RTB?

No, not actually.
The labeling of a 3rd wave always is impulsive so that is not an extension, but the internals of the wave.

Quote:5. If extensions as I understand it from #3 is correct, and they are no longer used, then it may happen what happens to 5 wave moves with 4 overlapping wave 1? From my own limited EW labeling, it seems that more often than not, wave 3 is usually "too short" without applying a I-II-1-2 type count.

Thanks again for your time and generosity.

Joe

I am not understanding that last part. Wave 3 cannot be shortest. That
is the only stipulation for wave 3 other than that it is a motive wave.