Gann 45degrees confirming butterfly bullish D point location on EURUSD ? ->
Can you check with your Gann indicators (swing top used is from 31October)?
there is no equality(full cycle) from high of 31 october
Originally Posted by kor4x
Last edited by CamaRon; 11-06-2012 at 01:07 PM.
yesterday bearish ABCD on EURJPY M15
zoom in PRZ - bearish Gartley on M1
Well yes but Kor is talking about 45 degrees, which is 1/8 of the cycle or?
Originally Posted by drapichrust
@wickedwin yes, so i described that i mean full cycle (360,720..) which i am using
I find the 45deg, 90deg and others working perfectly as support/resistance. Amazing, sometimes till the 1-2 pips precision. Still I studed only the first technique from the PDF, ... so I will shut up for this moment. More work on it next week...
if you want, but i think that main goal is you to look at Gann information with "fresh mind", test it and find something which works for you and share your observation, then we can exchange with the experience
Originally Posted by wickedwin
hm ... intersting reading...
From Gann's Square of 9 put to the test | Inside Forex trading
The experiments show that there is little evidence to suggest that prices respect Gann levels generated by the Square of 9 more than any other levels. The monthly data showed that price bounced off Gann levels 10 times vs 8 times for random levels – more but nevertheless an insufficient margin of difference to determine a bias.
If Gann levels had strong support and resistance qualities then they would be expected to contribute to making weekly and daily highs and lows given these tend to reflect stronger areas of support and resistance. In tests to verify this, however, the random level actually tended to coincide with price high and lows more often (152 and 412 vs 105 and 338) than the Gann levels – showing that a randomly generated set of levels actually may have predicted the spot of weekly and daily highs and lows better than the Gann levels on their own.
In addition when compared to Gann levels plus 100 pips the data showed that Gann levels were not substantially better at marking highs and lows with only 1 touch more than the Gann +100 level on the weekly and actually less touches (338 vs 355) for the daily data.
Whilst these experiments were by no means definitive they didn’t appear to show that Gann levels on their own work particularly well at marking highs and lows and only worked slightly better at marking major highs and lows in monthly data than random or derivative levels."
@kor subject of randomless vs Gann also crossed my mind, theory can be only be putted to test by falsification, and i hope this thread will help with that