who was left?, page-15

Spot on Gregoson.

I place the disclaimer on the formation, that disclaimer has occurred so it is voided. In fact did so on the 13/2 when it broke 4.5 support voiding the pattern.

IMO Martis although not right was merely a little early, as I do at at times. The tops of the cup were formed on the 17/11 and the 19/1. Martis called the cup top as the 9/1, of which not entirely incorrect it wasn't displaying equal levels as it di on the 19/1.

I clearly stated this:

"NMR had a double bottom on the 1/2 and 3/2, this is support for the handle. If that breaks then start again looking for the next sign.

For now the handle formation remains in tact, but I would like to see it rise from here toward the tip of the cup. If it goes on too long then the C&H is voided"

I clearly used the term "voided" and how it would be. As I did with what was required for confirmation, of which did not occur. I also stated the call was very early and may not eventuate.

In pure charting theory both Martis and I were merely following a recognised pattern. It doesn't make either of us wrong, it merely means the formation didn't occur.