Live Blog Chat-room 2

Friday, December 25, 2009

Figure 2, shows the count and the correct labeling of a triple zig-zag, this is from EWI's April 2006 issue of the Elliott Wave Theorist.
This is from Robert Balan's book on complex corrective waves. A complex wave "A", followed by a simple a-b-c for the "B" wave, and ending with a triple zig-zag for the "C" wave to finish the corrective wave.

I just want to lay this to rest, hopefully for the last time. This is a valid orthodox Elliott wave count!!!

A triple zig-zag can be used as a "C"wave, in an over-all a-b-c corrective wave, as observed from Robert Balan, who has been involved in counting Elliott waves for many years. He is not very well known in the US, but he is very respected in the European markets. He has gone into much more detailed corrective wave counts then Prechter did in his book. If you would like to download a FREE pdf, of Robert Balan's book Click here. He has some very complex corrective wave patterns in his book, and I would highly recommend everybody who wants to learn more about counting Elliott waves to take advantage of this free download.


  1. Hey Col, Merry Christmas!! (Taking a small digestion break from a big brunch) :). Who was calling the Triple Three invalid for a C Wave?

    Whoever it is, they are wrong. But if it makes them feel better, they can replace your Blue A-B-C (Intermediate Waves) with W-X-Y. It means *exactly* the same thing, but might be more widely accepted.

    Either way it doesn't matter, since your count above is *perfectly* acceptable exactly how you labeled it.

    Thanks for all your work brother and


  2. Hey Binve!!. Thanks for the comments.
    Replacing the blue A-B-C, with W-X-Y, would change to over-all wave to a complex corrective, but by leaving the A-B-C as it is, it is a simple corrective wave, with "A", and "C", as complex corrective waves, and the "B" as simple.(as in the middle chart) I hope that makes sense, LOL

  3. Hey Col, That does make sense. But the point I was getting at it that it is semantics whether we call it simple (A-B-C) or complex (W-X-Y). Because the point is, this is a three wave move at the Intermediate degree. The first wave (whether you call it A or W) is the same length as the third wave (whether you call it C or Y). And the overall Primary Wave 2 is fibonacci time interval in comparison to Wave 1 (almost perfectly 0.62).

    Moreover, like I said above, calling the 11 Minor Waves move as a C wave *is perfectly valid*. But if someone wants to be contrarian and argue that it is a W-X-Y *it doesn't matter*, because whether you argue that it is simple or complex the move looks done either way.

    I am just reiterating that I completely back up your view, and that I am also saying that for someone who is arguing the W-X-Y case, then they arrive at the same conclusion!!

    So main main point is: whoever is arguing with you about your count should just shut up .... :)

    Thanks again for all you work man!!!

  4. My attempt at some Elliot.

    I also plugged your site.