To bottom or not to bottom, that is the question

[Pretzel Logic]

I need a favor. Who can photoshop this picture and put? in Paulson's face below on the right and Bernanke's face below on the left? C'mon.? Don't make me beg!

 

Or maybe this pic of paulson, whichever works better. I aint no ar-teest!

 

703860[/snapback]

 

Only had a few minutes to devote to yer project, so it's far from my best work. But I think it's passable:

 

 

 

Edit: fixed Helicopter Boy

[Pretzel Logic]

Yeah, but do they make bottoms the same in bull and bear.? We might rather be suffering from "Triangles In Trouble" as suggested by Matt http://www.trivisonno.com/

703921[/snapback]

 

The setups are not comparable (referring back to your original post, not the link above). Note that in the 2008 charts, the level of supply keeps increasing (lower highs). Focus on the area where you would draw the upper trendline, and you'll see that while the lows are similar in all three charts, the highs are not. The bull market lows you show had higher lows AND higher highs. Additionally, we have made new closing lows in the current market.

 

I'm of the opinion that the market tanks soon. But... it is still at a point where it could go either way.

[kaotic]

Like I said earlier, once the 2003 lows breakdown on the Nikkei then there is ZERO SUPPORT below to save it..

 

Why am I no longer surprised to see many on the board looking for reasons to go long still? Very few can comprehend what is actually happening that's why!

[Pretzel Logic]

Like I said earlier, once the 2003 lows breakdown on the Nikkei then there is ZERO SUPPORT below to save it..

 

Why am I no longer surprised to see many on the board looking for reasons to go long still? Very few can comprehend what is actually happening that's why! 

703931[/snapback]

 

Yeah, I haven't been long since Oct. 14th. I can't believe how much bottom-picking I've seen since then, and I hope everyone here is playing very cautiously. I'm pretty convinced that within a few weeks, 900 will look as distant as 1200 does now.

[psyche doctor]

Like I said earlier, once the 2003 lows breakdown on the Nikkei then there is ZERO SUPPORT below to save it..

 

Why am I no longer surprised to see many on the board looking for reasons to go long stiall? Very few can comprehend what is actually happening that's why! 

703931[/snapback]

 

Many have been conditioned over the past six years. Since the bottom in 02', the market would often start to tank and would miraculously recover, reaming those short. Over this time, many have went short the trap door only to get ruined. I think it is hard for some to stay short because of this conditioning. They never know when the blast is going to come after taking the pipe so many times. Up until this Fall, I always bought the trap door, because I learned after getting screwed several times. However, times are different now, as the forces that would provoke the pole spikes are now impotent - trap doors are really trap doors.

[Pretzel Logic]

<---- was previously "conditioned," but decided early in October that this time is different, and that "trap doors really are trap doors."

 

Many have been conditioned over the past six years.  Since the bottom in 02', the market would often start to tank and would miraculously recover, reaming those short.  Over this time, many have went short the trap door only to get ruined.  I think it is hard for some to stay short because of this conditioning.  They never know when the blast is going to come after taking the pipe so many times.  Up until this Fall,  I always bought the trap door, because I learned after getting screwed several times.  However, times are different now, as the forces that would provoke the pole spikes are now impotent - trap doors are really trap doors.

703934[/snapback]

 

Exactly. I lost a bunch around these "trap doors" in '01 and '02/'03. Learned me good. I was initially looking for the same things heading into October, but this crash "feels" decidedly different, and I have since switched gears.

[phatbubble]

To psyche & prtzl's point, my generalized swing at the behavioral psychology involved here is that the undeployed bulls are waiting for the comfort of a V-bottom, and the undeployed bears are waiting out of fear of being burned by a V-bottom.

 

And in the absence of a V-bottom, the 'fundamental' backdrop of forced liquidations continues in a relentless drip torture of medium-volume selling.

 

The alternative to the V-bottom could be a scenario in which no election rally is forthcoming...and we just drip drip drip through the 2002 lows, with an occasional spike in either direction, into a much lower low in a couple months that marries Doc's 6 month cycle bottom and the Bradley turn.

 

Edit: all markets worldwide down overnight. Hangers down 12%, biggest drop since Tiananmen massacre. Is that a lot? No longer seems like it, starting to seem normal.

[Pretzel Logic]

To psyche & prtzl's point, my generalized swing at the behavioral psychology involved here is that the undeployed bulls are waiting for the comfort of a V-bottom, and the undeployed bears are waiting out of fear of being burned by a V-bottom.

 

And in the absence of a V-bottom, the 'fundamental' backdrop of forced liquidations continues in a relentless drip torture of medium-volume selling.

 

The alternative to the V-bottom could be a scenario in which no election rally is forthcoming...and we just drip drip drip through the 2002 lows, with an occasional spike in either direction, into a much lower low in a couple months that marries Doc's 6 month cycle bottom and the Bradley turn.

703950[/snapback]

 

The problem as I see it is: if they don't rally immediately, the market suffers severe, long-lasting psychological damage and there will be no drip -- it will quickly become a flood of selling.

[phatbubble]

The problem as I see it is: if they don't rally immediately, the market suffers severe, long-lasting psychological damage and there will be no drip -- it will quickly become a flood of selling.

703952[/snapback]

...which really is the behavior associated with the end of a major degree wave 3, isn't it.

 

Would imagine the low volume, the total disinterest, the 1974 funeral home described by Doc earlier, is the end of a 5.

[Pretzel Logic]

...which really is the behavior associated with the end of a major degree wave 3, isn't it.?

 

Would imagine the low volume, the total disinterest, the 1974 funeral home described by Doc earlier, is the end of a 5.

703956[/snapback]

 

EGGSactly.

 

I have been wrestling with the ewave count ever since 10/10. If you'll recall, I was concerned about a wave 4 triangle forming. My preferred count now has the next wave as a nested 3rd down -- wave 3 of 3 of 3 of 5 of ?. The larger 2 ended on the 21st around 980. The larger nested 1 of this 3rd wave started there and took us to about 860 on the 23rd. Nested 2 took us to about 910. We've since seen 1 of 3 of 3 of 5, and I believe 2 of 3 of 3 of 5 was the highs Friday. So... look out below, as they say in da forum.

 

It's a friggin' confusing count, and there is still the possibility that we're starting wave e up of a wave 4 triangle. I think, based on The End's post a couple days ago that the triangle e is probably Neely's preferred count (assuming here that TE still follows Neely)... but my gut says that's not right. We should know soon, as I think time has run out for the market to screw around. Either we rally hard pretty much immediately, confirming a wave e, or we tank hard immediately, confirming the nested 3rd.

 

Of course, so far everytime I've expected confirmation the next day, we get more extensions on the count.