However, from my understanding, I would argue that most of those springs did work.....albeit briefly (and the one that didn't work, put in a secondary test, then it did work). Price did rise after most of those springs, but the response was muted by the overall downtrend which eventually won out each time after the power or strength in the spring was consumed (unsurprisingly).
Yes there was not a sustained uptrend following any of those springs, but that is generally not what is to be expected of a spring anyway.
When a spring forms it will generally work for only a bar, or two, or three, or four anyway (in whatever timeframe you are using), then it is the overall trend which takes over, and exerts its influence on the future direction of price. So in an uptrend, after the strength of the spring has been used up, it is the uptrend which continues to carry price higher. And in a downtrend, after the strength of the spring has been used up, it is the overall downtrend which eventually thwarts any further rise in price, and rolls it over.
The bigger difference between a spring in an uptrend, compared to a spring in a downtrend, is the ease of movement higher, and the duration the spring will impart its strength for .
-Each bar after a successful spring would be expected to make more ground higher in an uptrend, than in a downtrend.
-And generally the spring may provide strength to perhaps three or even four bars (max) in an uptrend, but in a downtrend maybe only one or two before its strength is exhausted, and the overall trend starts to take over.
Finally, a truly failed spring, will not show any response at all......the spring will form ....and the very next bar just goes down......bang !! no response....fail.
(my understanding is.....a newly formed spring is only a 'potential' spring, and needs at least one upbar to follow it before it is considered a 'successful' spring.....and if the following bar is clearly down, it is considered a 'failed' spring)
