Do you remember those key levels I gave on December 4? BTC 87766, ETH 2917, SOL 132.2—all spot on. The 127.85 support for SOL's triple zigzag correction on December 6? Hit as well.
You might ask, how is it always so accurate?
Honestly, there’s no secret. The wave patterns are right there—if you have a solid grasp of Elliott Wave Theory, you can figure it out yourself. It’s just a tool—the difference is between a skilled worker and a newbie.
So what about now? Is it time to buy the dip?
Let’s look at the wave structure: the rebound from the evening of December 1 to the high on the 4th was a standard zigzag corrective wave. The drop from the 4th high? A triple zigzag. That small rebound last night was a retracement of the drop from the 4th, which is even clearer on a line chart—another zigzag.
If I’m counting the waves correctly, the rebound that started on December 1 does not form a double zigzag corrective wave. The triple zigzag decline starting on the 4th? It’s actually just part of a larger combination corrective wave.
I’ve given you the wave structure—where it goes from here, try to work it out yourself with Elliott Wave Theory. The answer is in there. I’ve already organized my conclusions; if you want a detailed breakdown, follow my upcoming updates.
BTC, ETH, and SOL all have interconnected short-term logic. Don’t rush in—get a clear understanding of the structure first.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
23 Likes
Reward
23
7
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
OnChainSleuth
· 12-10 15:54
Wave theory is indeed a challenging skill, and not many people truly master it. The reliability of your prediction framework is a bit extraordinary.
View OriginalReply0
SignatureDenied
· 12-10 09:20
It's the old wave theory again, and it's really fake to step on it
View OriginalReply0
ForkThisDAO
· 12-08 02:54
Alright then, the Elliott Wave Theory is indeed tough, but may I ask what to do if it fails next time?
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-e19e9c10
· 12-08 02:54
The Elliott Wave Theory is indeed impressive, but I still trust my own eyes a bit more.
View OriginalReply0
Anon4461
· 12-08 02:39
This guy is really a living encyclopedia of Elliott Wave Theory. He hits the mark every time—I'm impressed.
View OriginalReply0
NotAFinancialAdvice
· 12-08 02:37
Damn, is Elliott Wave Theory really that powerful? I need to study it seriously.
View OriginalReply0
UnruggableChad
· 12-08 02:36
Damn, hit them all again? This wave pattern is really amazing. I need to brush up on my studies.
Do you remember those key levels I gave on December 4? BTC 87766, ETH 2917, SOL 132.2—all spot on. The 127.85 support for SOL's triple zigzag correction on December 6? Hit as well.
You might ask, how is it always so accurate?
Honestly, there’s no secret. The wave patterns are right there—if you have a solid grasp of Elliott Wave Theory, you can figure it out yourself. It’s just a tool—the difference is between a skilled worker and a newbie.
So what about now? Is it time to buy the dip?
Let’s look at the wave structure: the rebound from the evening of December 1 to the high on the 4th was a standard zigzag corrective wave. The drop from the 4th high? A triple zigzag. That small rebound last night was a retracement of the drop from the 4th, which is even clearer on a line chart—another zigzag.
If I’m counting the waves correctly, the rebound that started on December 1 does not form a double zigzag corrective wave. The triple zigzag decline starting on the 4th? It’s actually just part of a larger combination corrective wave.
I’ve given you the wave structure—where it goes from here, try to work it out yourself with Elliott Wave Theory. The answer is in there. I’ve already organized my conclusions; if you want a detailed breakdown, follow my upcoming updates.
BTC, ETH, and SOL all have interconnected short-term logic. Don’t rush in—get a clear understanding of the structure first.