You must have a tough life to breed that bitter cynicism. I've known Al for many years and he is no charlatan. He doesn't need my defense, there are many, including myself who have benefited by the study of his work. My only involvement in these ignorant threads is to hopefully keep a new or developing trader from being diverted from a valuable source by mindless opinions.
So, then you know he divorced at least once (must have not been cheap to rejuvenate the wife by dumping the old hag and getting some fresh blood in) . Nor has there been a single penny that has been proven to be derived as pnl by him. Not sure what I misstated then. Trust whoever floats your boat. But don't go all salty on others just because they don't buy into your hype. You supporting charlatans like this guy is the greatest disservice you could EVER perform toward newcomers. Your opinion of him is even less substantiated than my proven claims. Where is your support of him being successful in his trading approach? Would love to see it.
I can only attest to my own benefits of studying his work. As to his income or net worth, I have no interest in knowing. Regarding the ex-wife (a lawyer), she left him and their three daughters when they were children. They are now well educated and comfortable young women.
a) a second ago you claimed you know Al very well, suddenly you "have no interest in knowing". Very interesting b) she left him for good reason if you knew the least of him. c) I don't know your approach to trading and would never dare to comment on it. So, it's irrelevant to this discussion how you yourself perform. Fact is that not a single penny is proven to be derived as pnl by al brooks. Defending and even advertising such type of guy, who can't be bothered to substantiate his claims, to beginners and newcomers is at best irresponsible and shortsighted.
No one seems to be able to make a definitive case for whether he's a "Fraud" or not. I'll keep trying Brooks and see how it goes. It seems just advanced TA so, food for thought anyway.
Then I suggest you avoid at all costs, who needs to see you deceived. No telling what response that might evoke
maybe the onus should be on him to prove he makes money if he's the one selling courses etc All I know is that there were huge 'furu' alarm bells when I was in his room back in the day (that basically mirror a huge percentage of his trading rooms reviews if you search for them) Mainly he'd always avoid making an actionable, live call. Clearly Too scared to get it wrong too much and lose his fan base so he'd just speak in wishy washy 'could go up, could go down' language and call out the various bar patterns he was looking at etc. And then when a move eventually happened, he'd imply he caught it. It reeked of a charlatan
Do you trust a car dealer who claims to know everything about cars to make the right recommendation for your new car? Do you trust a surgeon to perform a procedure on your wife or daughter who refuses or cannot prove that he had sufficient training and adheres to regulations? Do you trust someone on the street who claims he is selling you a gold Rolex to be telling the truth? Humanity established who has the burden of proof thousands of years ago. It's not us who have to disprove charlatans. It's charlatans who have the burden of proof to convince others they actually sell something of value. That burden of proof in the trading arena is without exception established by showcasing audited pnl.
He might be a Charlatan, but he still seems to have an indepth knowledge of TA. He did self teach himself for 20 years before writing the first Book, after finding all the other TA courses in the late 80s unhelpful. That self teaching, his high I.Q. (I assume) and his Medical backgroiund might account for his difficult to read writings.