Nicely done. Also, thanks for your efforts in attempting to provide information helpful to those interested in learning over at the TL thread. Good trading to you. - Spydertrader
Jack, While you're sitting there constructing your next chart, could you just run a quick account statement for us so we can see how well you've done over the years. It will take less time than actually drawing those arrows and such and sure would help all the newbs feel warm and fuzzy about everything you're (trying) to say... I'm not saying it's a convoluted puffed up wad of drool... but then again I'm not saying it isn't either. What I see in your writing in someone who has convinced himself that he is right on his assessment, that his methods make sense and are sound. That he has a gift for all if they are only willing to accept it... He can look at any chart and see how that fit's exactly into his thinking. I think you have the traders version of a Messianic Complex. Unfortunately it appears to be based on little more than your own imagination and very very poor testing, if any testing at all, not to mention the complete and utter lack of any real application or success... So, just take a couple of seconds and show us a real statement, or do the right thing and just admit here and now... "I'm not a trader and these are just my opinions."
neggative... Ammo I had never heard of Jack Hershey until he posted in this thread. So it's obvious that there are others out there who find him a little more than questionable. I just think it's sad that people don't require more proof... If you want to bang on the Hershey drum that's up to you... When you have some proof that you've made money with his work please let us know. The path to acceptance is easy.... all you need to do is provide proof.
i' an old dog, sticking with my present trading style, but jacks example is great for better entries...bring up the old news about jacks trading tournament and his friend is vintage nutjob, you, lying and asking for proof at the same time, this is a new low for you
Look captain save a snake... I'm not sure who you think I am but I'm not that guy. Regardless... You say Jacks method is great for better entries. Where is your proof, please provide us with proof that you've indeed tested and tried this real time. Highlight for us in a statistically significant way how his work improved your Transactional and Market Impacts. It's interesting that you dialed in on one example of the stuff I've researched on Jack and you took that and made an assumption. Is this how you also approach trading... You assume with no proof. This is why you're part of the problem. You're willing to support someone because you have a bias that matches their's or you have a bias against another person or belief... But at the end of the day old dog, you've not done your home-work. You've not applied any of the life lessons you learned elsewhere and now your just an old fool sitting around hoping for the best and picking fights just to be in it and be heard... You're fighting and arguing over something that you yourself have not even bothered to understand. It's the equivalent of two people fighting over a proposed bill when they haven't read it. Opinions without knowledge or understanding and it runs through every facet of our lives, from science, religion, race, politics and trading. We take this default characteristic - Know without Knowledge - and let it run rampant through ever single thing we do... The said thing is, really understanding something isn't that hard, it just requires applying ones self in a purposeful, intelligent and proven direction. And, it takes less time than arguing about it... If Ammo had spent his time researching instead of writing 8000 pointless replies he could have acquired deep understanding of finance and how the markets really work. Instead he's guru-nut-hugged his way to trader retardation. If you want to be a brain surgeon don't study under a witch doctor... It's that simple.
"The man is a master in his field. I recognise it. However, so often in life, what happens is that no sooner does a genius appear, that all the dunces in the world conspire against him (Appolinaire). I sympathise totally with the man and can only observe in wonderment how it is that he can persist in being so generous with his extensive knowledge despite persistent attack from everyone but the truly knowledgeable. He is an old boy who makes his statements on a take it or leave it basis. I am sure he does this in the full knowledge he will be pestered with questions and criticism, yet he reveals everything, but it is so advanced that very few are able to grab it or to realise the worth of what he says in his posts. I have often brought the risks in doing so to his notice, and that he ought to be more reticent and not discuss in public forums what ought not to be discussed in the way he does for everyone and his cat to read, yet he persists. I must addditionally comment that his generosity in this regard is truly unbelievable." I Agree 1000%
odd that the crap you call one example on jack was from your previous posts on et under a million other aliases and the one you have now is new again,,your full of bs,a loser....heres your example of jacks volume spikes and a cover using it http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=64965&perpage=6&pagenumber=15533
Hold on Mr. Know it all I can fix this quick... Would the ET staff please confirm that my IP is not the same as whoever it is ammo thinks it is. Ammo... just for arguments sake, let's say I'm someone else. Whoever you think I am, Okay, I'm that guy... There. Let's get to the point. Where is your proof that Jacks methods improve entry. don't show me a single chart shit stick... show me structured and rigorousness testing that you've done that supports it and clearly shows that this approach is better than a random entry. Then clearly show us how you've applied this in your trading. let me guess... You can't. no kidding. You're just making my points by constantly skirting the only thing that matters. You and all the Jack Hershey Jock Straps can flap your jaws all day long but you're wasting air. The only thing I'm trying to do here, is get the lurkers who are following along to THINK. Think about what I'm asking and what I'm saying, and look at the emotional responses it generates. Emotions don't make it right, you have to pull back, do real research and test. And, if you've done that don't you think you'ld be willing to present that research to back up your theory? If you're on here promoting a position which means you have no intention of protecting it, why not provide proof that it's legitimate.
Now back on point... Ammo you seem to be missing something here... JH posted 20+ pages of utter non-sense in my thread, so I called him out. I'm haven't chased him anywhere... he came here and at some point If I don't say something it appears that I "agree" with what he is writing in my thread - which I don't. So get your facts straight, he came here, I never went to him... I'm not the guy you think I am but it doesn't matter if I was. The point remains, neither Jack nor you have provided any proof that his work has any basis or that it has had any success on the hard right edge.
And this goes to show you're a mathematical idiot... there is nothing more than 100%. Unless you're saying your capacity to agree is actually 10,000% in which case you really only agree 10%... Emotional responses don't make it so. Show me the money Jerry...