>>53436965that's the dumbest TA i have seen on this board and i can still remember the fag who inspired picrel.
>>53437046Is it really that dumb if it works?
>>53436965nah, it's new paradigm time
>>53437096Your case? I don't think it fits as well
>>53436965imo everything that made sense before doesn't make sense anymore. People can't wait to buy in bitcoin and they don't want to miss it, it's came so far and was not shut down so far, and people and institutions are buying sooner than expected, so everyone is buying sooner
>>53437046I miss thick line bobobetter times
>>53437046You will always remember the TA that went against your bias as a "GOTCHA!!" memory, while forgetting the TA which was correct and you ignored.
>>53437071don't even know where to start, green was a lower high in 2018, perfectly drawing the meme hype graph double top with the following down trend. in 2022 green was a new high (above blue). this isn't remotely the same pattern.
>>53436965Dont underestimate the fomo and blowoff tops of echo bubbles. People will chase green candles.
>>53437161It's exactly the same with just enough minuscule differences to filter midwits like you.
>>53436965Holy shit this retarded bobo is drawing crayon colored top pictures comparing blowoff top to double top just realized. We are going to 40k.
>>53437146The TA actually is correct. If you're looking at the right chart. In this case, it's DXY.
>>53437139>it's came so far and was not shut down so far, and people and institutions are buying sooner than expected, so everyone is buying soonerso why aren't they buying it? lmfao dumb mumus
>>53437201>minuscule differencesthat's not a minuscule difference, the meme hype graph has a reasoning behind it, the second lower second top is a rejection pattern, which reverses the trend to bearish. none of that happened in 2022, it was a bullish trend that was artificially crushed by a rapid change in the monetary policy of the fed. to assume that you can align certain points of these sub-graphs to each other is just stupid.
>>53437565So your proposal is that it was supposed to go to 100k all along but didn't because le news? No. The big players had this in mind the whole time. They aren't stupid.
>>53436965>Doing TA on a zoomed out linear chart
>>53437096/biz/ and CT are still too active and optimistic, board needs be dead and in disbelief for new paradigm time
>>53437603yes if the fed wouldn't have started to raise interest rates then bitcoin would have topped out at about 100k, probably a little bit lower. and it certainly would have never dropped below its previous ATH (which was mostly driven by the FTX hysteria). the situations just aren't comparable in the way you're attempting here, i.e. by aligning certain points in the graphs. bitcoin price is low at the moment, buy and hold if you agree and stop the daytrading, you're only giving your money to bigger players.
We literally shot to 23800 and then right back to 22900. How strong is this 23k resistance? Anyway, still bullish
20k EoM unironically
>>53437741Board activity is dead we are literally same 50 people talking to each other and the thomas fudding chainlink thats it.
>>53436965nigger, it was 1 year bear from top to bottom on both, draw your little circles time accurate
>>53437768>How strong is this 23k resistance?Pretty strong. There's a lot of convergence on it, right at this moment in time. I said last night that if mumu can break through it and hold, bulls have earned a bull run.
>>53436965Wise, considering the tech layoffs happening and how algos treat crypto like it's tech stock.
>>53439266very possible. Wouldn't surprise me one bit.
>>53436965Why is the first purple lower than the first yellow while then second purple is equal to or higher than the second yellow?
>>53436965Downtrend is still intact
>>53439321Normal variation caused by whales driving fomo and rinsing retail.