Bitcoin: Can the reclaimed support hold? | Part 1 of 3Bitcoin / U.S. dollarBITSTAMP:BTCUSDDrVic_MarketXI’m returning to the current price action because there is an important piece to add to my earlier AVWAP analysis: the lower boundary of the long-term parallel channel. That is the white line on this chart. My previous channel publication explains where it comes from and why I’m watching it. Price has reclaimed this boundary and the AVWAP. The weekly EMA50 is also converging with the channel boundary, bringing several important references into the same area. While price holds this structure, it supports the continuation case. Two areas I’m watching The first is roughly $76–80k, where the channel boundary, weekly EMA50, AVWAP and nearby support zone are coming together. These references move over time, so I’m treating this as an area rather than one exact price. The second is around $71k, within the broader $69–73k region near the weekly EMA200 and the lower support zone. A pullback there would also revisit the fair value gap left by the strong price move before. The EMA50 helps me assess the recovery of the weekly trend. The EMA200 provides a longer-term reference below it. Neither replaces the price structure. Why a deeper pullback cuts both ways A move toward $71k could produce a higher low and give buyers another opportunity to defend the recovery. But reaching that level would also mean trading below the white channel boundary again. That is why I wouldn’t automatically interpret an EMA200 retest, return to the gap or a higher low as bullish confirmation. How price gets there—and what it does afterward—matters more. A wicking lower followed by a strong reclaim would be constructive. A decisive weekly close below the reclaimed area, followed by difficulty recovering it, would raise more concern. The FVG does not need to be filled completely. The brief move into lets say midpoint, followed by a strong rejection of lower prices and a reclaim of the channel boundary, would support the bullish case. Spending time inside the gap, with bearish candles closing progressively lower and little recovery would weaken the case. That is why depth of the revisit matters less than the response and whether price can recover the larger structure. Price could simply bounce from this area, form what looks like a higher low, then return to the white line and reject it as resistance. In that case, the higher low would not have resolved the larger weakness. What would strengthen either case? Holding the channel boundary and AVWAP, then breaking the rebound high, would strengthen the continuation case. The resistance area around $95–98k would become an important test if price advances. If we get a deeper pullback, I want to see buyers defend support and recover the lost structure. The bearish scenario requires several failures: lose the reclaimed area, fail to recover it, show little buying response around the lower support, and eventually break the previous lows. For me, defending this reclaimed structure carries more weight than simply revisiting the FVG or printing a higher low beneath it. Can this recovery sustain? My bias remains cautiously bullish as long as price holds the reclaimed structure. In Part 2, I’ll compare the wider channel structure and historical percentage moves. Part 3 will examine the QT backdrop behind the comparison. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DrVic_MarketX | The Market Surgeon 🩺 Analyze. Dissect. Adapt.