http://www.lambertganneducators.com/newsletters/jesselivermore.php W.D. Gann, in 45 Years in Wall Street (page 117) described Livermore as "one of the most spectacular traders of his day". Gann stated that Livermore was an honourable man who "believed in paying debts even after he had been relieved through the courts of bankruptcy". In fact, Livermore and many other traders and investors, including Gann himself, once lost their money when the brokerage firm Murray Mitchell and Company failed in 1913. In Gann's words "In 1917 when Livermore came back and made a fortune, he not only paid back my proportionate part of money which I lost through the Mitchell failure, but paid everyone else". Gann added, "This was an honourable thing to do, and because of Livermore's honor and honesty, in 1934 when he was broke, I backed him and got other people to raise money and back him. Livermore came back again and made money". Gann's one criticism of Livermore was that Livermore had only studied how to make money - not how to keep money. In Gann's words "He had the greed and the drive for power, and when he got a large amount of money, he could not trade conservatively. He tried to make the market go his way instead of waiting until the market was ready to follow the natural trend".
You have quite the little hard-on for Livermore, don't you Harry? Why don't you try reading his biography? It's fascinating stuff.
I'm curious as to where Gann got his money to help Livermore since Gann never really made any money off the markets but rather selling his wares, according to his his son.
gann never making any money.... is that right? he never made any money??? I read some accounts that he made $50mil over the course of his lifetime.
??? I'm not hard-on him since Livermore is one my prefered trader and I have already recommended to read his book - as I have already done it myself. You have really a rather weird reaction ! What's happened to him is sad and since he was one of the best you should rather consider his true life as an example instead of hiding your head in the sand as if it has never happened because you want an invicible hero !
Livermore made the course of his lifetime $100 mil. and lost it all. Perhaps that's what happened also to Gann I don't know. According to his son, I don't remember where I read that, when he died he only left 100000$ to his family. At least Elder who dislikes Gurus's predictors like Gann said in his book that he questioned his son and concluded that his myth is a crap. But I suspect Elder to be harsh with Gann to sell more his book . It seems that traders that don't like the idea that stock market can be somehow predictable can find all kind of negative argument to dismiss other traders that pretend to do so like Gann.
Livermore should be a lesson to all traders. Maybe it is true that in the end, the market takes no prisoners!
haha! that's a good one! I think I will stop predicting markets. It's hard as hell. And mostly futile. Everytime, I start to "think" I got it figure out where the market is going, I lose money. When I just follow the trend, I make money.
Of course it's hard as Hell But if you can read in the mind's Hell that's different . I predicted on 22th (calculation done on 21th) that the cross-pattern of my model was at 9515: cross-pattern are turning point in my model - as indicated on my homepage. <IMG SRC=F:\EasyPHP\www\econometric-wave\market\images\2003\october\dji\221003\forecast_9515.gif> http://www.econometric-wave.com/mar.../221003/static_analysis_141003_and_091003.gif Check on Thursday for the first part of forecast. http://www.econometric-wave.com/mar...21003/static_analysis_141003_and_091003_2.gif Check for Friday not done yet but you should have seen the big drop on 9498 and a higher low at 9515 that is to say exactly the cross-pattern of 9515/9498 on my model's chart indicated on 22th October. P.S.: It is not based on Numerology of Fibonacci numbers but on RATIONAL econometric modelling that is to say I DENY STRICTLY TECHNICAL ANALYSTS EXPLANATION that the market is driven by PSYCHOLOGY OF CROWD, I will rather inverse the paradigm : it is the MARKET that drives this psychology and it does so rationally that's why it is predictable. If it is the inverse it is impossible to do so at least not with precision but only with stochastic law with fuzzy errors of 50 or 100 points or even more which is not the case of my model: it is a deterministic model - with often 2 points errors.