Zeev, maybe you could help me understand the turnips thinking re a cyclical bull. You had thought as I recall a Cyclic Bull was to begin in January 03, but the character of the advance was "poor"; so a HFTH was called. Why could not the double bottom in July and October 02 been good enough to have the seeds of the cyclical bull? That is, the tops since then have been of poor quality also. I do not understand why it is not just as likely that we have been in a trading range since the 1260 range October 15 to 1520 range in January. The capitulation that you needed was July, October.
Even though the next few weeks of earnings will be poor and the economy looks grim, the markets leads as you have taught. Why could not the very high % 10 dmas on the indices be a proxy for the new high emergence, which will lag? P S, don't you think the shorts still have alot more to contribute?
Respectfully submitted, Rick S
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
