The requirement, stated plainly
A reversal pattern requires a prior move in the opposite direction. A double top after a rise is a possible reversal. The identical drawing with no rise behind it is the upper edge of a range, and it is describing a market that has been doing this for months.
This is 04.05.01's rule arriving at chart scale, and the wording carries over unchanged: a shape is a question, and location is the answer. What has changed is only the unit. There, location meant the sessions around a candle. Here it means the weeks before a shape.
The same two highs, without the climb
From the first peak onward this is 07.02.01's path exactly. Before it, price was going nowhere.
Put this beside the chart on the previous page. The right-hand halves are the same line. The names are not the same name.
Why the name changes when the shape does not
On the rising path, ₹120 is a price the market had never dealt with before. Reaching it twice and failing twice is a new event.
On the flat path, ₹120 is a price the market has visited four times already. Reaching it twice more is what this market does. Nothing has been refused that was not refused last month, and a chart reader who calls it a top is claiming that the fifth and sixth visits mean something the first four did not.
The middle low tells the same story twice over. On the rising path, ₹108 is the lowest price since the climb began, so a close beneath it would be new information. On the flat path, price has been under ₹108 repeatedly. A boundary that has already been broken several times is not a boundary.
Without a prior move, a reversal pattern is a range with two of its visits drawn in bold.
And now the hard part: how much rise counts?
Every book states the requirement and almost none of them quantifies it. A prior uptrend, a meaningful advance, a preceding move — none is a measurement, and 04.05.04's argument applies in full. A condition nobody has put a number to cannot be checked, and a condition that cannot be checked cannot be failed.
Three honest questions follow from it, and this page answers none of them because nobody has:
Over what window? The rise from ₹92 to ₹120 is 30% over several weeks. Measured over a year it might be a recovery inside a larger decline. Measured over five days there is no rise at all.
How large? 30% obviously qualifies. Does 8%? Does 3%? There is no published line, and the one you adopt will decide how many patterns you find — which 07.01.04 measures.
Straight, or merely net? The path from ₹92 climbs unevenly. A path that fell 15% in the middle and still finished higher has a net rise. Whether that satisfies a prior uptrend is a judgement, and it is yours.
Where hindsight gets in
This is the part worth guarding, because the requirement is normally applied after the shape has been noticed.
You see two highs. You then look left for a rise, and you choose how far left to look. If six weeks shows one, you stop there. If it does not, it is natural to try three months. The window is being selected to make the pattern qualify, and nothing about that feels dishonest while it is happening.
The discipline is the one 07.02.01 already used for the boundary: fix the rule before you look. Decide the lookback window and the size that counts as a prior move, write both down, and then apply them. A requirement chosen after the fact has not been applied to the pattern — it has been fitted around it.
03.03.05 is the same error under its proper name. Using information from after a decision to justify the decision is look-ahead, and it improves results rather than breaking them, which is why it survives.