The problem with the backtest is that there are supposed to be verifiable data. Armstrong's team does not provide historical data. Therefore the backtest but be regarded with skepticism.
All that backtest is supposed to do is to show how this backtest has performed in the past ( yes, according to MA). In my view this is historical data. It's just a bit labour intensive to bring this into tabular format, but it can be done.Now you have a hint how you can possibly make some profits with some numbers (without subjectivity). On the monthly level it's indeed difficult or impossible to verify because it takes so many years of history, especially if you do not trust the numbers on the chart and you think they are fake. But on the daily and weekly level. you could try it out and/or backtest other charts like this for that time scope.
If only Reversals are close to 100% reliable then any elected Reversal elected by less than 1% could be entered for a guaranteed trade, if it were the case.
elected reversals are good if there is a bull or bear market. In sideway market, elected reversals don't perform so well (or even bad). After all, they should perform well though , if one is staying long enough in the market to catch the bull and bear markets. This is all without the arrays.
Armstrong says you cannot use the GMW etc to trade as it is not a trading tool etc. Those other things simply increase contradictions and conflicting signals.
well, that's a whole new topic on it's own...
For the moment I don't want to prove that Socrates is great unless someone is paying me a decent bonus

. I just want to prove that there are various false assumptions and false statements made here in the forum.