I'm going to throw the following arguments and let me know if it makes sense. Because I'm still positive that we have to end wave 2 sometime.
- The big deep was an ABC correction
- Then we had wave 1
- We started wave 2 around $950
- Wave 2 (corrective) is usually flat or zigzag, triangles are not so common
- Thus, wave 2 as per the image is a corrective zigzag which is composite by IMPULSIVE (A)-CORRECTIVE (B)-IMPULSIVE (C)
- Wave B retraces 50% to 61.8% of wave A which is around $910
- Also as per the image corrective red wave B is made by blue A-B-C and also if we retrace wave blue A = C, we get $910
- Then we start red wave C and last leg of wave 2
- Usually in a zigzag Wave A = C, which ends on $740 (fibo region)
- Also, if we have this $910 movement and then down to $740 there is a nice H&S formation
- $910 is also a nice resistance
Too much coincidence?
What do you guys think about this idea?
- The big deep was an ABC correction
- Then we had wave 1
- We started wave 2 around $950
- Wave 2 (corrective) is usually flat or zigzag, triangles are not so common
- Thus, wave 2 as per the image is a corrective zigzag which is composite by IMPULSIVE (A)-CORRECTIVE (B)-IMPULSIVE (C)
- Wave B retraces 50% to 61.8% of wave A which is around $910
- Also as per the image corrective red wave B is made by blue A-B-C and also if we retrace wave blue A = C, we get $910
- Then we start red wave C and last leg of wave 2
- Usually in a zigzag Wave A = C, which ends on $740 (fibo region)
- Also, if we have this $910 movement and then down to $740 there is a nice H&S formation
- $910 is also a nice resistance
Too much coincidence?
What do you guys think about this idea?
