向各位朋友请教X浪

弥勒佛

Originally posted by 汀兰 at 2005-2-24 10:33
p43 页： “记住，。。。。。。” 第二行

没有啊?再来点前后提示:(

唐朝

Originally posted by 弥勒佛 at 2005-2-24 10:32
请唐朝看E文最后一句

抱歉！e文不好！

汀兰

Originally posted by CNB at 2005-2-24 08:41
精彩！
俺也掺乎掺乎。。。
普莱切特提出的W、Y，将联合调整模式ABC－X－ABC，标示为W-X-Y，其本意是为了提高浪X的级别，俺个人认为是有些问题的。。。
实践中观察，浪Ｘ的规模一般要比W、Y要小得多，因此有理由怀疑，普莱切特的观点未必正确，CNB倾向于忠于原著，对任何波浪理论的所谓创新与发展，都应审慎对待，波浪理论永远属于伟大的艾略特。

多谢老大掺和
:D
这个W X Y，俺也是一直稀里糊涂

现在我理解是： Y，不是简单地把ABC合并称谓做Y。原因，请见图例 1-47
Y，是所谓行动浪 —— 或者叫作用浪，actionary，大多数作用浪以驱动方式发展，少数的，比如
Y 可以以调整方式发展。也就是说，Y 可以表现为3个分量，分别是ABC
但是（以下是汀兰的学习心得）Y 不否认以5浪方式发展，5浪方式发展的图例就在
1-47，内部33333 的5个分量结构，这个结构是不能划分成ABC三浪的。所以，普教主才给予新的编码
Y，来表示调整中这个整体的一浪

至于汀兰叫它尾楔子，是为了方便，因为最后一个浪—— 尾巴，楔子本来特指倾斜三角形的，
既然 Y 是混血儿。。。。

（其实二楼里，汀兰已经称呼这三房是尾楔子了，不过似乎一次性抛出这么多乱七八糟的东西不太好，
所以更改了，简单写的 5 浪）

汀兰

最好你再把后面的E文贴多点，对应这段的：

一个原因是，联合形调整浪中从未出现过一个以上的锯齿形，也没有一个以上的三角形。记住，三角形调整浪仅在更大趋势的最后一轮运动  之前  出现。联合形调整浪看起来认可了这种特性，因而仅在双重三浪或三冲三浪中做为最后一浪走出三角乡。

前句话说 之前，后句说 最后一浪 。呵呵。。。

弥勒佛

Originally posted by 汀兰 at 2005-2-24 10:41


看书的意思，“允许”X 浪以三角形的方式出现
这三角，2允许，不过少见
更多地出现在倒数第二浪里（行动浪的倒数第二个分量）
所以4，B，最后一个X
三角形调整浪也会作为联合型调整浪中的最后一个作用模式 ...

是啊,一样一样
所以我才说讨论非常非常有必要!!

看这第一句,三角可以极端地/罕见地在2浪里
我还和唐朝争来着,汗.........

汀兰

还有，应该已经回答唐朝的问题了

在最后一浪里出现 —— 4 的最后一浪
但是这个出现了最后一浪是三角形调整浪的联合调整浪，要在更大一级行动浪的倒数第二浪出现
倒数第一浪是 5，倒数第二浪是 4

弥勒佛

Originally posted by 汀兰 at 2005-2-24 10:55



多谢老大掺和
:D
这个W X Y，俺也是一直稀里糊涂

现在我理解是： Y，不是简单地把ABC合并称谓做Y。原因，请见图例 1-47
Y，是所谓行动浪 —— 或者叫作用浪，actionary，大多数作用浪以驱动方式发展 ...

我的理解是分两种情况
1,锯齿(双,三)
2,联合调整
这两种一定要严格区分,因为1是空间的调整;2是时间的调整
至于楔子,千万别用了,本来就够乱了

汀兰

另外问题继续

4 以联合调整浪发展，而且最后一个Y 是三角形，后面出5 —— 行动浪

B，以联合调整浪发展，而且最后一个Y 是三角形，后面出C —— 行动浪 行不行？

快晕头了。。。。。这个问题刚刚想到，就贴了，哈哈

弥勒佛

Although different in that their angle of trend is sharper than the sideways trend of combinations, double and triple zigzags can be characterized as non-horizontal combinations, as Elliott seemed to suggest in Nature's Law. However, double and triple threes are different from double and triple zigzags, not only in their angle but in their goal. In a double or triple zigzag, the first zigzag is rarely large enough to constitute an adequate price correction of the preceding wave. The doubling or tripling of the initial form is typically necessary to create an adequately sized price retracement. In a combination, however, the first simple pattern often constitutes an adequate price correction. The doubling or tripling appears to occur mainly to extend the duration of the corrective process after price targets have been substantially met. Sometimes additional time is needed to reach a channel line or achieve a stronger kinship with the other correction in an impulse wave. As the consolidation continues, the attendant psychology and fundamentals extend their trends accordingly.
As this section makes clear, there is a qualitative difference between the number series 3 + 4 + 4 + 4, etc., and the series 5 + 4 + 4 + 4, etc. Notice that while impulse waves have a total count of 5, with extensions leading to 9, 13 or 17 waves, and so on, corrective waves have a count of 3, with combinations leading to 7 or 11 waves, and so on. Triangles appear to be an exception, although they can be counted as one would a triple three, totaling 11 waves. Thus, if an internal count is unclear, the analyst can sometimes reach a reasonable conclusion merely by counting waves. A count of 9, 13 or 17 with few overlaps, for instance, is likely motive, while a count of 7, 11 or 15 with numerous overlaps is likely corrective. The main exceptions are diagonal triangles of both types, which are hybrids of motive and corrective forces

汀兰

Originally posted by 弥勒佛 at 2005-2-24 11:18



我的理解是分两种情况
1,锯齿(双,三)
2,联合调整
这两种一定要严格区分,因为1是空间的调整;2是时间的调整
至于楔子,千万别用了,本来就够乱了

那我就这么表述好了，其实是重复说话，但这是讨论的必要

在联合调整浪里，最后一个浪，以三角形调整的方式发展，并成为Y，这个Y，可否分解成ABC？

至于楔子，这么用是有原因的，不提也罢

汀兰

Originally posted by 弥勒佛 at 2005-2-24 11:23
Although different in that their angle of trend is sharper than the sideways trend of combinations, double and triple zigzags can be characterized as non-horizontal combinations, as Elliott seemed to suggest in Nature's Law. However, double and triple threes are different from double and triple zigzags, not only in their angle but in their goal. In a double or triple zigzag, the first zigzag is rarely large enough to constitute an adequate price correction of the preceding wave. The doubling or tripling of the initial form is typically necessary to create an adequately sized price retracement. In a combination, however, the first simple pattern often constitutes an adequate price correction. The doubling or tripling appears to occur mainly to extend the duration of the corrective process after price targets have been substantially met. Sometimes additional time is needed to reach a channel line or achieve a stronger kinship with the other correction in an impulse wave. As the consolidation continues, the attendant psychology and fundamentals extend their trends accordingly.
As this section makes clear, there is a qualitative difference between the number series 3 + 4 + 4 + 4, etc., and the series 5 + 4 + 4 + 4, etc. Notice that while impulse waves have a total count of 5, with extensions leading to 9, 13 or 17 waves, and so on, corrective waves have a count of 3, with combinations leading to 7 or 11 waves, and so on. Triangles appear to be an exception, although they can be counted as one would a triple three, totaling 11 waves. Thus, if an internal count is unclear, the analyst can sometimes reach a reasonable conclusion merely by counting waves. A count of 9, 13 or 17 with few overlaps, for instance, is likely motive, while a count of 7, 11 or 15 with numerous overlaps is likely corrective. The main exceptions are diagonal triangles of both types, which are hybrids of motive and corrective forces

你是快手啊

弥勒佛

Originally posted by 汀兰 at 2005-2-24 11:26


那我就这么表述好了，其实是重复说话，但这是讨论的必要

在联合调整浪里，最后一个浪，以三角形调整的方式发展，并成为Y，这个Y，可否分解成ABC？

至于楔子，这么用是有原因的，不提也罢

当然不行

我的意思是,一定要分清双矩尺(包括3锯齿)和联合调整浪的区别
联合调整浪是指由单一的锯齿/平台/三角组成的以调整时间为目的的盘当(我一直明白书中盘当的原意)

双锯齿是以调整空间为目的的锯齿的联合,中间的X任何都行(这地理解上要出问题)

(我一直明白书中盘当的原意)
错了,我想说的是一直不明白:*3*:

[ Last edited by 弥勒佛 on 2005-2-24 at 11:43 ]

弥勒佛

从上看出楔子可以出现
它可能是平台的C或锯齿的C
但决不是三角型那样成为一个单独的分量

随波起舞

我的观点:
1.三角形不能在驱动五浪的第二浪作为调整浪出现.那么在X 浪里,没有说明不可以是三角形.

三角形和锯齿形作为调整浪或者调整浪衔接浪x时,他们的区别在与:三角形走的比较矛盾.比较拘谨,不能够明显,不能明显走出自己前面的价格范围,而呈现一种收敛通道.33333.而锯齿可以大刀阔斧的走出去.那么在人的心理方面我的理解是:

在调整两里,尤其已经走完一个ABC以后,人们已经开始怀疑调整已经结束了,可能一个新的上升驱动浪开始了.而33333这种三角形走的如此犹豫,只有作为倾斜三角形出现时候才可以作为浪一.已经证明33333带领作为浪一的驱动五浪很少见.同时它作为浪五时作为楔形时看跌意味非常大.可见,33333本身就是一个耗费多头力量的形态.

那么如果在双重的调整浪里如果33333作为x,那么市场为什么在一个ABC后会变的如此犹豫和矛盾.

三角形的特性是:成交量开始逐渐萎缩.在三角形开始和顶点的2/3时间处发生突破.波动范围变窄,成交量变少.当然,如果向上倾斜的话,是什么能够让交易商如此矛盾的放量接受更多的持仓呢?而且连续5个3,这么长时间的形态不容易保持,所以,结论是这种形态在x里出现的概率一定小与锯齿形态.至少1:3(瞎说的)那么在三重调整浪里的第二个x就更不要如此犹豫了,概率就更小了.

从统计上看.调整浪分为一重,双重,三重,如果主观的估计,双重和三重很少见.占20%.(瞎说的)

所以如果出现了x,那么它以三角形运行的可能性很小.(按照波浪理论)呵呵~~~俺也可以灌水的!!~~~

[ Last edited by 随波起舞 on 2005-2-24 at 11:50 ]

汀兰

Originally posted by 弥勒佛 at 2005-2-24 11:35


当然不行

我的意思是,一定要分清双矩尺(包括3锯齿)和联合调整浪的区别
联合调整浪是指由单一的锯齿/平台/三角组成的以调整时间为目的的盘当(我一直明白书中盘当的原意)

双锯齿是以调整空间为目的的锯齿 ...

94，分解不了，所以是个整体Y，内部5浪，不搞个Y来咋整 :*3*:
锯齿的，可以分解，内部是ABC，不用Y也中

弥勒佛

Originally posted by 汀兰 at 2005-2-24 11:30


你是快手啊

是这段吧,我的E文都快忘光了:*3*:

汀兰

Originally posted by 随波起舞 at 2005-2-24 11:39
我的观点:
1.三角形不能在驱动五浪的第二浪作为调整浪出现.那么在X 浪里,没有说明不可以是三角形.

三角形和锯齿形作为调整浪或者调整浪衔接浪x时,他们的区别在与:三角形走的比较矛盾.比较拘谨,不能够明显,不能明显走出自己前面的价格范围,而呈现一种收敛通道.33333.而锯齿可以大刀阔斧的走出去.那么在人的心理方面我的理解是:
ABC,双重abc,三重abc.而比较明显的一个abc更常见.如果主观的说,双重,和三重加起来占20%.那么双重多一些的话.占15%
在调整两里,尤其已经走完一个ABC以后,人们已经开始怀疑调整已经结束了,可能一个新的上升驱动浪开始了.而33333这种三角形走的如此犹豫,只有作为倾斜三角形出现时候才可以作为浪一.已经证明33333带领作为浪一的驱动五浪很少见.同时它作为浪五时作为楔形时看跌意味非常大.可见,33333本身就是一个耗费多头力量的形态.

那么如果在双重的调整浪里如果33333作为x,那么市场为什么在一个ABC后会变的如此犹豫和矛盾.

三角形的特性是:成交量开始逐渐萎缩.在三角形开始和顶点的2/3时间处发生突破.波动范围变窄,成交量变少.当然,如果向上倾斜的话,是什么能够让交易商如此矛盾的放量接受更多的持仓呢?而且连续5个3,这么长时间的形态不容易保持,所以,结论是这种形态在x里出现的概率一定小与锯齿形态.至少1:3(瞎说的)那么在三重调整浪里的第二个x就更不要如此犹豫了,概率就更小了.

所以如果出现了x,那么它以三角形运行的可能性很小.(这些是按照波浪理论分析的)呵呵~~~俺也可以灌水的!!~~~

怕你又删，先quote 再说 :D，你发言比较长，我看得慢 。。。
不小心 quote 重复了
先饭饭，回头细看

[ Last edited by 汀兰 on 2005-2-24 at 11:51 ]

汀兰

呵呵，你 quote 的是结尾；你问的，我敲字敲了半天的，是他前面一个自然段

汀兰

YI，还是删了文字了吧？ 随波起舞，你手也快地很那。。。。。。

弥勒佛

啊??????,你再看

Double and Triple Threes
Elliott called sideways combinations of corrective patterns "double threes" and "triple threes." While a single three is any zigzag or flat, a triangle is an allowable final component of such combinations and in this context is called a "three." A double or triple three, then, is a combination of simpler types of corrections, including the various types of zigzags, flats and triangles. Their occurrence appears to be the flat correction's way of extending sideways action. As with double and triple zigzags, each simple corrective pattern is labeled W, Y and Z. The reactionary waves, labeled X, can take the shape of any corrective pattern but are most commonly zigzags.

Combinations of threes were labeled differently by Elliott at different times, although the illustrative pattern always took the shape of two or three juxtaposed flats, as shown in Figures 1-45 and 1-46. However, the component patterns more commonly alternate in form. For example, a flat followed by a triangle is a more typical type of double three, as illustrated in Figure 1-47.



Figure 1-45 Figure 1-46



Figure 1-47

A flat followed by a zigzag is another example, as shown in Figure 1-48. Naturally, since the figures in this section depict corrections in bull markets, they need only be inverted to observe them as upward corrections in bear markets.



Figure 1-48

For the most part, double threes and triple threes are horizontal in character. Elliott indicated that the entire formations could slant against the larger trend, although we have never found this to be the case. One reason is that there never appears to be more than one zigzag in a combination. Neither is there more than one triangle. Recall that triangles occurring alone precede the final movement of a larger trend. Combinations appear to recognize this character and sport triangles only as the final wave in a double or triple three.