IMO a correction down to 420$ could invalidate the bullish scenario, so permabulls better hope it stops at 480$.
How 62% retracement of $190 -> $800 move could invalidate something?
img]https://www.tradingview.com/x/34G6zC2F/[/img]
The first correction was about 30%. A new correction, from 700$ to 420$, would be 40%, and would increase the chances of a weak rebound and a third leg down.
Assuming this was a wave 3 and now we have a 4, it should stay mostly above 1 (475$). If it drops to 420$, then this might have been THE B wave and we could see a final bottom close to 100$.
But for now I see little reason for the doom scenario, the Chinese manipulators can make more money pumping than dumping. So I expect another 30%, from 700$ to 490$.
How can you speak about elliot waves and then jump on "chinese manipulation". Elliot was is about crowd psychology to be short, and directly tied to natural laws. You can't be succesful using elliot waves if you don't even understand the core of it...
According to this count:
The weekly sma20 is gonna be revisited first.
img]https://www.tradingview.com/x/b5sdS9uw/[/img]
The weekly sma20 is gonna be revisited first.
img]https://www.tradingview.com/x/b5sdS9uw/[/img]
MasterLuc, I had a very similar count, but then a community member (same as usual) highlighted an issue with it. how can you count five waves in the i waves without breaking overlap rule firstly, and also without making the third wave the shortest??? I tried very hard to do so, but rules were consistently broken...