Ten modules, fifty-seven lessons on dominancy: how to identify the dominant rhythm, rank nested cycles, and recognise when a larger one is taking control. The work is demonstrated through study cases on Bitcoin's four-year cycle, Telstra's 90-month wheel, and the Nifty 50 — including a projection that failed.
Not ready to buy? Read the full case →
One payment · Lifetime access · NDA + identity verification
This course teaches a method, so the proof is worked cases, not testimonials. Say the awkward part first: these counts were drawn backwards. Each one is measured from lows already in the record, then walked forward against what the chart went on to do. That demonstrates the method. It is not evidence of foresight, and I will not dress it up as any. They are closed historical studies — not signal calls, and not forecasts of anything ahead.
Before you read them, you should know where they came from, because it is not flattering. In 2011 I was long silver on a count I had checked three times. Inside 48 hours I was down more than $50,000. The count was not wrong — it was junior, a multi-year wheel was turning against it, and nothing in my method could rank the two. This course is the ranking I went looking for that week and could not find in any book. It is also why the first case below carries a failed projection I could have quietly left out, and you would never have known. I teach the miss. A method that only ever shows you winners is not teaching you to check anything.
Telstra’s all-time low is $2.55, printed on 17 November 2010. Count forward 90 months and you land in May 2018 — a seven-year low, with the actual low in June. One clean hit, inside a one-month orb. Count forward another 90 months and you land in November 2025, where the projection failed outright: Telstra was making eight-year highs. One hit, one miss, on a stock with under thirty years of history — which means the 90-month wheel has not yet completed a single full circle. It is not proof of a repeating cycle, and I do not present it as one. It is the honest record of a large wheel setting the schedule the smaller rhythms are read against, and the course teaches both halves.
Bitcoin’s major lows fall in November 2011, January 2015, December 2018 and November 2022 — spacings of 38, 47 and 47 months. That is three completed intervals, not a proven cycle, and the first one is nowhere near four years. Here is the part almost nobody checks: the halvings themselves have never been four years apart either. They run 3.61, 3.84 and 3.94 years, because the schedule is counted in blocks rather than calendar time. The popular "four-year cycle" is a rounding error people repeat. Which is exactly the point. Once the headline number dissolves, you still need to know what the long wheel is doing and whether it outranks the shorter rhythms inside it — and that ranking is the course. The count is the easy half. Knowing which one holds authority is the half nobody sells you.
You are thinking you could count those spacings yourself this afternoon. You could. Arithmetic is free. What is not free is the ranking — knowing which of those wheels holds authority right now, and when the larger one is about to overrun the smaller. That judgement is the whole of what $2,997 buys.
The Nifty 50 is worked as a search rather than a demonstration — the lesson is called "seek and ye shall find," which is the honest name for it. You watch the method hunt for a cycle in an unfamiliar index, and you watch what it takes to decide whether what turns up is real or wishful. That is more useful than a clean result. You learn it once and read any chart that has enough history.
The primary cycle runs roughly 13 to 21 weeks — Bressert and Jones set that band out in 1984, and Merriman, who apprenticed under Bressert, publishes the same figures. Three to four turns a year, every year, in every market you watch. Wait twelve months and you have read a dozen turns without knowing which wheel was in control. Here is the part that compounds against you: each one teaches the wrong habit. You fit the count afterwards, it feels like understanding, and the habit hardens. The method does not expire. The turns do not come back.
A 5-week cycle can look bullish inside a bearish primary cycle. The trader who cannot tell the difference enters the best-looking trade and gets stopped out before the larger rhythm pays.
Cycle work copied without its context becomes a meme. Someone screenshots a low-to-low count, posts it as a "secret," and a careful method turns into a slogan. The reader who paid to learn the judgement loses the thing they paid for: a method other people respect, not one they have seen ten times on a forum.
You are buying a skill, not a subscription. Once you can find the dominant cycle on a blank chart, no one needs to find it for you again. The cycle-length spreadsheet, seeded with Merriman's published mean cycle lengths, makes the work faster, but the reading is yours. That stays with you for the rest of your career.
Verification is plain. You sign an NDA that covers no redistribution, no public teaching, and no resale. You submit a photo of your face beside your government photo ID through a secure portal. Sensitive numbers may be redacted; we check your name, photo, and address. A person reviews each submission by hand, and access is released after approval.
The refund clause: If for any reason we cannot verify your identity, no access is released and we work with you directly to resolve it. No change-of-mind refunds once access is released. This does not limit your rights under the Australian Consumer Law. The verification gate is the only point at which money moves backwards.
Each module adds one layer to the reading. You start with what a cycle is, then dominance, hierarchy, validation, the working desk, and four modules of worked cases. By the end you can find the primary cycle on a chart you have never seen.
Somewhere in that list you were waiting for me to tell you what to buy. There are no signals here and never will be. You are buying the reading, and the reading is only worth anything once it is yours.
A page that only tells you what is strong about a method is an advertisement. These are the questions serious people actually ask.
Counting a low to a low is free, and you can do it in a spreadsheet this afternoon. What is not free is judgement: telling a real cycle from a curve-fit, knowing when a smaller rhythm is about to be overrun by a larger one, and reading a chart you have never seen before without a result to fit it to. That is the skill this course builds, worked on real cases including one that misses. Free tools give you the arithmetic. This gives you the discipline to use it.
Because the method degrades when it is copied without its context. A screenshot of a cycle count posted as a "secret" turns a careful reading into a slogan, and the people who paid to learn it lose the thing that made it worth paying for. Verification is plain: a photo ID check and an NDA covering no redistribution, no public teaching, no resale. Sensitive numbers can be redacted. A person reviews every submission by hand.
There aren't any, and there won't be. This teaches you to find the dominant cycle yourself, on any chart, using worked historical cases as the training ground — not a feed of calls to follow. If you want to be told what to buy today, this is the wrong purchase, and I would rather say so now than after you have paid.
No. The course teaches cycle measurement, hierarchy, and validation on price history — Bitcoin, Telstra, the Nifty 50 — using tools like the Optuma periodogram, Timing Solution, and a spreadsheet you build yourself. What drives the underlying timing model is not published on this site, and it does not need to be for you to learn the reading skill.
The Telstra case in this course is one hit and one miss on the same 90-month count, taught as both. Bitcoin's own halving schedule is presented as proof the popular "four-year cycle" is a rounding error, not a clean win. If a method only ever showed winners, it would not be worth the price of admission.
Yes, and it would be dishonest to pretend otherwise. Both are commercial packages licensed by the year, and this course does not replace that cost. What you own permanently is the method and the spreadsheet and scripts you build yourself — the judgement, not the software.
If we cannot verify your identity, no access is released, and we work with you directly to resolve it before anything else happens. Once access is released and verified, there are no change-of-mind refunds — that does not limit your rights under the Australian Consumer Law.
You want live trade signals
There are none here, and there never will be. This teaches you to find the dominant cycle yourself. If you want somebody to tell you what to trade on Tuesday, this is not that course.
You won't complete identity verification
Access is gated behind an ID check and an NDA, reviewed by hand. If that step is a dealbreaker for you, save yourself the friction and don't enrol.
You only trade intraday timeframes
The primary cycle runs roughly 13 to 21 weeks. This is a swing and position-timing method, not a scalping tool, and it will frustrate you if that is not the timeframe you work in.
You want a fully automated system
There is a spreadsheet and Pine editor scripts to speed the work up, but the reading is a judgement skill you build over time, not a set-and-forget indicator.
That is the first case for doing this, and it is the one that changes how you see a chart. You stop asking what the market is doing and start asking which wheel is asking the question.
The second case is the one that costs money. The primary cycle runs 13 to 21 weeks — three to four turns a year, in every market you follow, whether or not you can rank them. Wait twelve months and you will have read a dozen windows blind. Worse, you will have spent twelve months practising the habit of fitting a count to a move after the move, which feels like understanding and is not.
The third case is the mechanics. Ten modules, fifty-seven lessons. The principle of dominancy and the hierarchy that ranks it. Three worked cases on real charts, one of them a failure taught as a failure. The cycle-length spreadsheet, the Pine editor scripts you write yourself, and Merriman's published cycle lengths as your starting reference. Paid once. Yours after verification, including every refinement added later.
Enrolment process — After payment, complete a two-minute identity check via Stripe (government ID + selfie) and sign a non-disclosure agreement. Course access is issued after both are reviewed.
Enrol — AUD $2,997 →Identity check and NDA required before access is released · no change-of-mind refunds, which does not limit your rights under the Australian Consumer Law.