- Posts: 692
- Thank you received: 0
GKP
WS, could you please explain the numbers quoted above as I don't understand them? Thanks,
Diver
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Posts: 634
- Thank you received: 0
WS
diver993 wrote: "structurally and technically remains in good shape as long 154/7/161 remains intact"
WS, could you please explain the numbers quoted above as I don't understand them? Thanks,
Diver
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Posts: 634
- Thank you received: 0
cheers WS
dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/40497882/gkp_invH%26S_oct13.JPG
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Posts: 519
- Thank you received: 0
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Posts: 634
- Thank you received: 0
but thanks F4T for your opinion, sometimes its the irregular one that you need to pay attention to, every tom dick n harry can make out the normal ones as they are are easier to identify (if there ever is such one)... and more often than not they fail cos everybody tries to play em.
just putting out what i see, try to force something that not there on the other hand can be dangerous...learnt that lesson a longtime ago...
all imho
cheers WS !
Food4Thought wrote: I don't think that qualifies as an iH&S personally. Too irregular in many places. Perhaps you are looking for something that is not there. SP certainly broke out of symetrical triangle yesterday though, on the hourly and daily on my charts.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
