Wave analysis - page 16
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
I've talked about this in almost every post. Read Neely's book, then ask questions.
Crucify yourself in code. You can play Bach's Crucifictoriousus for inspiration. It's great music.
Neely fans seem to be something of a new cult - one answer to any question is "read the book". And the same abundance, as around any sect, of empty words and ponces.
If you knew the basics, you wouldn't be writing such things. Get into the subject, I assure you the questions will be completely different and on topic.
If you knew the basics, you wouldn't be writing such things. Go into the topic, I assure you, the questions will be different and on-topic.
Maybe the questions will be on-topic, but I doubt that the answers will be on-topic. However, answers such as "you have not read carefully" are guaranteed. I've seen it before, no Neely fan, then neither be nor me, just dreams and fantasies.
Maybe the questions will be on-topic, but I doubt the answers will be on-topic.
First you have to ask the question on the topic, then comment, but for now it's just a shake of the air.
First you need to ask a question on the subject, then comment, but so far it's only shaking of the air.
So far, more airshaking is more from you. The question has been asked to you, the answer is the standard "read the book". You can't answer a simple question.
I've seen it before, no Neelie fan, no ba, no me, just dreams and fantasies.
I am neither a fan nor a supporter of Neely. Once again, Neely for me is a 100% algorithm to break down the ZigZag into patterns.
I am neither a fan nor a supporter of Neely. I'll say it again - Neely for me is a 100% algorithm for breaking down ZigZag into patterns.
That's what everyone says - we are not sectarians, we are true believers. In fact, what is the point of the sentence "100% pattern-breaking algorithm"?
So far, more shaking of the air is more from you. The question has been asked to you, the answer is the standard 'read the book'. You can't answer a simple question.
What question? If you mean three beams into the future, it doesn't matter to Neely how many beams you need in the future zero or more. The index markup will have slightly more designations for the latter waves.
What is the question? If you mean three beams into the future, it doesn't matter to Neely how many beams zero or more are needed in the future. The index marking will have slightly more designations for the last waves.
So you didn't even understand the question.