Virtually every wave count that any Elliott Wave analysts can come up with, can be destroyed very quickly. Destroying wave counts is the number one function that wave analysts should be doing, as only then can we find a better fitting wave count. 99.99% of the time we can always find a better fitting wave count by going back in chart history. Dragging a wave count around for 20 or 30 years and not having the markets confirm it, is not a wave count that gives out any degree of confidence.

Moving wave positions around after the 2000 peak is a cosmetic way of wave counting, and this process never works. I found myself in the same trap many times, and the only way to fix that is to constantly review the largest degree we "think" we are working in. We will never find the largest degree correctly if we do not "print" out a 200-300 year chart of the DOW and analyze all the wave one-two counts.

Cosmetic wave counting is what the majority of wave counters do, trying to keep us believing in this mythical but very popular wave count.

With Cosmetic wave counting, we never have to go back and review the largest degree, but only adjust the waves after the 2000 peak. This way the majority can use the GSC degree designation for many, decades and even for 100 or more years, and always be right! GSC degree wave counters already have a 60 year wave one-two, so why should GSC degree wave 4 not last just as long or a bit longer?

All it takes is just "one" degree being out of sequence anywhere in the past, and any wave count can be destroyed with just one new location of a wave one-two set. Never mind 3 or 4 complete sets of wave one-two positions. I have posted those wave 1-2 positions many times already, but recently I have adjusted my wave count up by one degree.

Many of these GSC degree wave counters say we are approaching a "B" wave top in Cycle degree. My wave counting tells me that there is no chance that a "B" wave in Cycle degree will fit in any peak in 2014.

In stocks wave 3 should always be the longest wave, and any extensions usually occur in the last final degree of any 5th wave. The idealized script in GSC degree is the most important thing we can draw out as that is where we extend wave 3 with. This is done with a one-two wave counting method, and I mentioned 4 sets of these combinations. Why 4 sets? I use 4 sets because all my wave counts were exactly 4 degrees lower than any GSC degree wave count out today. (2000 peak)

I also would need to find 4 sets of one-two waves in the past, and all we need to do is go back to the 1929 stock market peak. Going back to DOW 1000 is like going back to the 1970's time period in stock prices, which is still far away from any depression era stock prices.

We don't have to argue about the last 600 point difference just now, but when we look at 1970's prices for all other indices, then any 5 wave decline in Primary degree will never fit.

Make no mistake about it, as the GSC degree wave counters "must" get 5 waves down in Primary degree, otherwise they still have not confirmed a single part of any GSC degree wave counts anywhere!

This is not Elliott Wave rocket science folks, but a basic understanding of a 3-3-5 "ABC" pattern. The only thing that changes is the degree.

I had to make a change to my wave count which brings my Cycle degree wave 3 back to the 2007 peak as the 1980 pattern is my wave one-two in Primary degree. My wave 1-2 in Cycle degree was a very short wave which instantly should also tell us that wave three should be the extended wave. With this wave count I only need three sets of One-Two waves with each set being sequentially lower every time. Extending the waves down to Minor degree would still give us 4 complete sets of 1-2 waves subdividing all waves to the 2007 peak.

Since all my wave counts are based on a one-two base, the markets cannot crash down to these wave two bottoms. This gives any Cycle degree wave 4 bottom a completely different price level, which at the worst case scenario would fall below the 2009 price around the DJIA 5500. In the 1900's the DJIA stop well short of crashing that deep, so even the DJIA can produce a running flat type pattern.

I could no longer keep the diagonal 5th wave alive at this time, as it has also become extremely hard to count out. It takes time to get the feel of a changed wave count compounded by the fact we have three major peaks to jockey wave counts with. It is at the extremes like we are now, when it is time to review all the wave positions as this market seems to be a market of expanded patterns. They are not the only expanded flats as there are many smaller ones as well. Instead of a Cycle degree "B" wave top we could be at a Minor degree "B" wave top, with both requiring 5 waves down. The difference is 3 degree levels.