kenl - Unless I am missing something there are two problems with this count as you show it. One will go away IF you change your count of (Y). This count as a whole consist of two ABC connected by an (X) wave. It is a double sideways combination. The (X) wave retraces at least 70% of (W) as it should. (Y) can be any corrective pattern except a double or triple. Change your count of [Y] to eliminate one problem. The decline from (X) to 666 doesn't work as you have it labeled. It would have to be a flat since the b wave has retraced all of the a wave, That would leave 5 waves down in c to go. The sub waves of a flat is 3-3-5. This decline from (X) can be a flat wave A of a flat wave [Y]. It can also be all of a flat wave [Y]. Wave [Y] may have to go below 666.79 if we do not get a new high because [Y] must be equal to or greater than (X) in price. The only exception to this rule is if wave [Y] is a triangle. [Y] could be a triangle. As you know a triangle only appears as the last wave prior to the last wave of a pattern of one higher degree.
There is another reason I don't think this count is valid. The drop from 1370 to 1074 would have to be three waves as the A of a flat. It naturally counts as 5 making it an impulse wave. If it is five waves this cannot be a of a flat. The sub waves of a flat are 3-3-5. This cannot be a of a zig zag because it is nearly 100% retraced by b. The decline from (X) to 666 must be a flat but it cannot be a flat so the whole count IMO is invalid. I have really tried to make this understandable. If I have failed let me know. If you see something I have missed let me know.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
