Filling the Weekly Gap Triggers a Rally

2008/3/11 15:22:15

Today, everyone was staring at the weekly gap above 4062 that both bulls and bears have been eyeing for N months. As it turned out, quite a few front-ran it, resulting in the gap being just 1 point short of fully filled. Of course, for short-term trading, this isn't particularly important. Technically, the 1-minute decline has also formed. The only thing that needs to be determined now is whether the second hub will directly produce a third-type buy point to rally upward, or whether the c segment of the a+A+b+B+c pattern needs to play out first before a standard divergence sends it up.

Previously, there have already been two similar bottom points. Today's bottom point is basically on the line connecting the two previous bottom points. Now, the market shows an initial descending triangle formation, but the key is that this connecting line of the two bottom points must not be broken.

Since this decline is only at the 1-minute level, it cannot cause real damage to the original 30-minute consolidation. Therefore, from the perspective of the 30-minute decline since 6124, true divergence has not yet appeared. Of course, consolidation-type divergence can also create bottom points, followed by a direct rally from a third-type buy point. But this requires subsequent confirmation. Before that confirmation, the oscillation pattern won't change — meaning once an upward thrust loses momentum, the only correct choice is to exit the positions entered on today's bottom-fishing.

Going forward, the worst-case scenario would of course be: after a rally, the first hub of a 5-minute decline forms, then it continues to break below the connecting line of the previous two bottom points, and finally forms true 30-minute divergence (of course, in an extreme situation like the US in 1987, there would be no divergence).

The best case is a continuation of the 30-minute consolidation. Therefore, one should have a clear technical grasp of the general structure of the short-term movement.

On individual stocks — see, the moment there's a rally, those charging ahead are basically the so-called "junk stocks" around 10 yuan, along with previously strong sectors: venture capital, agriculture, military, consumer goods, and so on. So the distribution of market capital hasn't changed, and this situation will persist for a considerable time.

On today's news front, things aren't actually good. A certain vice chairman, in a rather ungracious manner, said something about how the stock market isn't a place for just anyone. Is this appropriate to say at a time like this? For those who've already entered and been hurt, isn't this just pouring salt on wounds? Should words like these really come from the mouth of a regulator?

So, the current market doesn't lack rallies or oscillations, but where's the real reason to go up? If the regulators themselves won't even set an example, how can the market have confidence?

More importantly, one must understand: this market cannot rely on anyone, including the regulators. You can only rely on your own skill and mindset. If you're strong enough, no one can knock you down.

This ID despises those sentiments begging regulators to rescue the market. Save it or don't — we're not your prisoners or servants. Your salaries are paid by our tax revenue. If you lack basic decency and speak disrespectfully to the market's true owners, that only proves that the caliber of people in the regulatory bodies has not reached the level that our tax dollars should be paying for.

Some people are so used to playing lord and master. People at the CSRC should first go study what a service-oriented government means, and reflect on how far your department is from that standard. Don't think you're something special — bestowing gifts from on high upon the nation's hundreds of millions of investors, as if you were God. Do you even qualify?

When the market is poorly managed, who should be held accountable to the taxpayers — that is the real question!

Heading off now, see you.