Hahahahahah. WTF..... it is not about the candle sticks. It is about how transactions are made. It is not about charts and lines. It is market context and trade facilitation. If markets dont change then why had the majority of pit traders have difficulties transitioning to electronic markets? This is total bullshit. Another thing Al Broke teaches i think.
to answer your question it is not something they are used to...... but i agree with you, it is about transactions.....that is why the market exists, the market's job is to facilitate transactions maybe he has become Al Broke...... it is emotions that drive traders to make transactions and it has always been emotions that drive markets ..you may place orders on the phone to your broker or you may do it online nowadays that will not never change.but it is emotions that drive you to do it
Institutions drive the markets. We pip-squeak traders with our potatoe chip money don’t drive the markets with all our desperate emotions. Thus please feel free to discharge the concept that our emotions drive it. Price moves nary one tick unless an institution wants it to move. And institutions or institutions have orders to fill and they push back and forth to drive the markets to their best interest. We emotional creatures jump on the bandwagon. Hopefully we choose the side of the institutions that will give us winning trades and $$$ to spend.
ROFLMAO ...BUT those trades ..transactions..market context...leaves charts (graphical footprints) and changing lines all over the place...ROFLMAO ...that I might add can be useful in determining market direction as they show us what the institutions are doing and which side is winning...losing...they cannot hide what the are doing.....ROFLMAO BYE i am presently in a conference on secularism and compartmentalization as it is intrinsic in W.V. thus driving behaviour and creating operating systems for reality. Must now focus on the class.
Ah, I see you accessed my passport photo. Let's go on a little flight of fancy, shall we? From the web site I linked earlier: https://www.tradingschools.org/reviews/al-brooks-trading/ ...What does an Al Brooks prediction look like? Well, lets start with the trading room, and what we heard… “Indecision bars, indecision bars, with a possible micro bubble climax definitely looking to buy support. But sellers may overwhelm swing, so looking to sell at resistence trigger” “Double bottom probably buyers on doji candle looking for long entry and short entry on resistence failure short entry for quick profit, be aggressive and careful with either position” “Final flag, final flag, definitely final flag probably entering trading range with close support at possible entry point for aggresive buyers and definite exit point on multi-point sell position” “Failure reversal bull flag with sellers climax possible sell, but looking to buy on minor pullback of micro bubble. Indecision bars signalling continuation of reversal points.” On and on, throughout the trading day, Al Brooks talks his way through the trading session. Making these weird, highly indigestible, utterly confusing references to things that apparently only he can see. Not once does he ever say, “I am going long at price X, stop at price Y, target at Z.” Nothing he say’s is ever direct, concise, or definable. The entire trading room is meant to be a lesson in confusing terminology, innuendo, and twisted statements. Everything is meant to lead the consumer back to the reference material, in other words, if you buy the book specifically on Trends, then you will understand what I am saying. And after you buy the book on Reversals, then you understand this. And after buy the book on Ranges, then you can understand the ranges terminology. And if the books are not enough, then you need to purchase the 36-hour course that ties it all together. And you need to keep paying $99 per month and watch the live trading room, and eventually it will sink in. On and on it goes, until finally the disgruntled and dismayed start writing to TradingSchools.Org and complaining and are pissed off about wasting time and money... ___________________
This is an interesting point of view but I don't quite grasp 'market context and trade facilitation' If you have time and inclination, can you expand on this and how pit traders struggled? It would make for an interesting new thread on why pit traders could not transition over.
Pit trading was a distinct activity from trading upstairs. The tools and edges of the pit trader were peculiar to the pit. Take them out of that environment and put them in front of a computer screen,and it is no different for them than it has been for any of us: It is starting a new skill from scratch. https://www.ft.com/content/4d221b22-3dfb-11e6-8716-a4a71e8140b0 (I added the emphasis below to highlight what I think is most relevant). The traders and brokers jostling on the floor did meld into a kind of machine for price discovery. “It was like one giant computer, where each moment everybody was saying what their bids and offers and quantities would be,” says Henry Jarecki, former board member of the Commodity Exchange, acquired by Nymex. But the human computer had limitations, notably that it gave occupants a first look at shifts in market flow. “You’re in a situation where your benefit is seeing things that the world at large can’t see,” says Dr Jarecki, who is also a psychiatrist. The futures pits dried up first. After years of resistance, Nymex adopted CME’s Globex system and allowed electronic futures to trade simultaneously with the pits in September 2006. The shift was swift and severe. Electronics rose from 17 per cent to 70 per cent of Nymex volumes by June 2007. Total volumes also soared, with the West Texas Intermediate crude benchmark doubling between 2005 and 2007. Some veterans were bewildered. On the floor, a trader might know which broker did business for a big bank or aggressive hedge fund and could buy on signs that a broker was in the market. “On a screen, you don’t know who’s on the other side — or if it’s a person at all,” says Mr Ardizzone, who now runs an electronic trading group. Craig Weinstein was trading heating oil and crude in a combination known as a crack spread (a refinery’s profit margin from “cracking” crude oil into distinct fuels) when the computers took charge. In his best years he was earning $900,000 and owned a house in suburban New Jersey, a Porsche and two Harley-Davidsons. “No one ever told you this market was going to end,” Mr Weinstein says. “All of a sudden it was lose, lose, lose. I would lose a thousand, two thousand, three thousand. The first month I lost 30 grand I was like, OK, I’m losing money, this is not working any more. I just stopped.”
like you said you can write it on a disposable napkin however his basic concepts are still good for a trader: H1 2 ETC, DO NOT TRADE COUNTERTREND UNTIL YOU SEE REALLY STRONG COUNTERTREND STRENGHT and a good reversal signal; there are a few good things. i have never paid for any for his teachings having found all free on the net including his books and even his video course. i do not think he has brought anything new to the table and i do not think anyone can bring anything new because market have not really changed. i bought a course from Toni Hansen and found the same thing:new terms like phoenix for old technical patterns. there is a lot of truth in what you say but if you search the rubbish you do find a few diamonds
good point institutions do 90% of the volume but do you not think institutional managers do not get emotional as they have to beat the market to remain in their jobs and get their bonuses