Don Cameron's handle was dufferdon, wasn't it? I wondered what happened to him, and certainly we all wish him well.
In an attempt to learn more and it seems others are interested I am trying to trade jack's 'fast or rocket trades'. I have read through quite a bit to try and get it straight (MIF and Don Cameron's site) and will report here my trades and hopefully Jack can critique them and provide further insight to his method. I will also try my best to attach .gifs with the trades written on charts. Hopefully we can all learn something. If i should put this in another thread just let me know, but i thought this was the place place to bring this up. Thanks. I have my screen setup as Jack suggests: 5m Price Volume Stoch (5,2,3) Stoch (10,2,3) Stoch (14,1,3) MACD (5,13,6) and have a 1min screen with same info to get a better picture as what potentially lies ahead for the 5m. My understanding of the Fast/Rocket Trade: Use the Stoch (14,1,3) enter LONG when both the fast and slow move above 80 and exit when both leave the 80. Enter SHORT when both the fast and slow are below 20 and exit when they both leave the 20. Ignore anything else on the stoch indicator. Trade #1: Stoch (14,1,3) 9.38(fast), 10.74(slow) 10:20 Short @ 845.00 10:43 Cover @ 847.00 Total: -2.00 Day: -2.00 Comments: Shorted on the move to new lows. MACD was below ) and sloping downward the first few minutes of the trade. At 10:35 the stoch read 30.00(fast), 20.78(slow) as this was barely over 20 and not trying to picky, I would wait and see what the next bar brought. At 10:40 stoch was 25.00(f), 22.25(s) there was a little spike up over some reversal bars so the i closed my short. I did not enter again b/c the next potential entry was after 11:15 and the MACD appeared to be very choppy and directionless. Trade #2: Stoch 12.50(f) 12.10(s) 1:25 Short @ 841.75 2:02 Cover @ 842.00 Total: -2.25 Day: -2.25 Comments: Market making new lows of day MACD below 0 not by a lot but faster line moving away from slow line. At 13:50 the lack of follow through in the nq to make new lows while the es made new lows concerned me (negative div. in my mind). At 1:44 the 1m MACD XO and at 11:55 the 5m MACD XO. Trade was exited with the stoch at 36.36(f) 25.76(s) 2:00 5m bar for a tiny loss. Trade #3: Stoch 95.45(f) 87.96(s) 3:27 Long @ 842.75 4:00 Sell @ 844.75 (market close) Total: +2.00 Day: -0.25 Comments: Upward sloping MACD above 0 and moving away from slower line. Other stoch (5,2,3) and (10,2,3) also in their respective buy zones. Concerns during trade were at 3:42 the 1m MACD XO and a 1m trend line was broken. Both Stochs never closed belwo 80 on the 5m. Stayed in trade and closed at 4pm. Jack please give any comments or suggestions.
If you enter on new lows you should be willing to take the risk of exiting on the last high swing. If you did like that you would make money on both shorts. BTW, you need no stochastics to trade like that, it's simply trading by price action.
dawg, put this in another thread and call it something like "Jack Hershey's Rocket Trades Strategy" or whatever... Perhaps put it in the Journal section? Just a thought... Give him some glory!...
Good move dawg. Now we'll see if Jack Hershey decides to "Belly Up to the Bar". I think not ......... ( prove me wrong Jack ).
I like Version77's idea, Dawg, devote a separate thread to Jack's system. I thought about doing the same thing you did., particularly after Jack said 45 ES points was "normal". What a crock!!! For kicks, I backtested for a week starting this month, and was not impressed. I have BA in accounting, and a law degree, and I still can't understand most of what Jack says. Nor have I seen anyone post here or elsewhere that they are consistently profitable using this methodology. Nevertheless, I look forward to seeing the results of Dawg's undertaking.
I don't mean to brag, but I have a Ph.D. in theoretical physics, have been using stochastics successfully for trading in non-standard ways, and still don't get completely what he says, and the way he says it does not encourage me very much to get interested in his method. That's why I was hoping he would explain his stuff in a more pedagogical way in this thread. Maybe there is something to it. I find stochastics very useful. However today my stochastics method would beat his by a very wide margin. It was a great day for this method. I mentioned it in one of the past threads, 'Good entries for newbies' or something like that.
I saw the posts, went to the link, tried hard to understand what Jack said, and either I am doing it totally wrong...or it does not seem to work. It does catch some nice moves, but 10pts does not cover up 14pts lost before you catch it.
Wally, I would have to say your Ph.D. in theoretical physics trumps my Juris Doctorate degree. Damn, and you made me go to Webster's to look up pedagogical too. Seriously, though, I think if Jack really wanted to better the lives of others he could have formulated a much simpler explanation of his methodology. So, is it a case of if you can't dazzle em' with brillance, baffle em' with BS?
Well, yes... his explanation leaves somewhat to be desired for sure... I am not a big believer in mechanical systems (I guess he tries to make it mechanical with all these parameters) based on stochastics. A simple system based on the price action (such as the entry on the last low swing and the stop-exit on the last high swing with the target determined in a discretionary way) would do better in the same circumstances. I use stochastics for discretionary trades only.