Yeah, the plan has taken a different route so far, with a gap of about 17% from the expected path.
But technically speaking, if the price closes an hour below 65254, the nearest sequence becomes:
73754 → 65254 → 56754
On the flip side, if it doesn't close an hour below 65254, the bounce scenario remains:
73754 → 82254 → 90754
Between 73754 and the current price, I only see one technical hiccup, and only God knows.
In two sentences:
• 65254 is the key; breaking it = downtrend
• Not breaking it = uptrend.
Honestly, the first phase hasn't delivered the results we were aiming for as expected. If I were to rate it today, I wouldn't give it more than 1%.
So this analysis comes with a more realistic outlook, hoping we can read the next phase more accurately and correct some of the reasons that affected the previous estimate.
We will continue to observe and post updates in real time at key levels, until the direction becomes clearer, and it shows which of the two sequences will be closer to the next price movement.
Only God knows.
But technically speaking, if the price closes an hour below 65254, the nearest sequence becomes:
73754 → 65254 → 56754
On the flip side, if it doesn't close an hour below 65254, the bounce scenario remains:
73754 → 82254 → 90754
Between 73754 and the current price, I only see one technical hiccup, and only God knows.
In two sentences:
• 65254 is the key; breaking it = downtrend
• Not breaking it = uptrend.
Honestly, the first phase hasn't delivered the results we were aiming for as expected. If I were to rate it today, I wouldn't give it more than 1%.
So this analysis comes with a more realistic outlook, hoping we can read the next phase more accurately and correct some of the reasons that affected the previous estimate.
We will continue to observe and post updates in real time at key levels, until the direction becomes clearer, and it shows which of the two sequences will be closer to the next price movement.
Only God knows.