medium · Elliott Wave Theory
In a double three labeled W-X-Y, W is a zigzag and Y is a flat. An analyst argues the combination is invalid because the two corrective patterns differ in type.
Why is this objection wrong, and what is the single hard constraint that actually governs W and Y?
- The objection is wrong because W and Y may be different corrective types; the binding rule is that neither W nor Y may itself be a multiple (double or triple) three
- The objection is correct because every component of a valid double three, including both W and Y, must share the exact same corrective pattern type throughout the whole structure
- The objection is wrong, but the only real constraint offered is that X must always take the form of a zigzag pattern retracing more than the full extent of W
- The objection is wrong; the binding rule is instead that Y must always travel farther in price than W did, since that is what confirms the combination's overall trend direction
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More Elliott Wave Theory practice
- In a five-wave advance, Wave 1 is 10 points long, Wave 3 is… — How should this count be co
- A commodity price moves from $80 to $96, pullbacks to $88, t… — If an analyst identifies t
- Which is more likely?
- According to the Swing Count Validation technique, what should the trader conclude?
- Based on common Fibonacci relationships, how far might Wave C drop from the end of Wave B?
- An analyst sees a 'Close-Below-Prior-Swing Test' fire when p… — What does this likely sign
- According to the 'Fourth-Wave Target Zone' guideline, where is a correction most likely to
- According to the Guideline of Alternation, what should you expect for Wave 4?