Of the hundreds of posts read on this subject your last two are the best. Reasonable, intelligent with no axe to grind that I can see. Thank you for the posts. All the best,
Quote from Jack Sexbuy: §$%&&/()!"§$%&/&$%$..... ************************ talking about that boring graphic: up right it says something about inflamed emotions... well - WHO is the one who constantly creates the most naughty posts with the excessive use of the f*** word here? and if those posts are not the product of inflamed emotions, then what is? with any single further "inflamed emotions"- post he surely will make he proves one more time that he cannot trade - which is the reason for his "inflamed emotions" which is... but i'm repeating myself - this is soo boring. alone the fact that he is so obsessed with the names of chicken, 666 and myself is AGAIN a confirmation of what i was already pointing out before. somebody who himself believes what he tries to sell here wouldn't react at all - let alone in this form. you sick guys should read a few things about psychology. i bet i could set the EXACT same trap 10 more times and you all would be trapped again and again - so much for your ability to learn.
That is what is so strange about this whole debate. A number of knowledgable people have pointed out that there is nothing new or revolutionary in what Jack teaches so it would seem what people are reacting to is his personality. Always in trading is not new. Trading without stops is not new. Using Prorata volume is not new. Gaussians are not new, etc. ad nauseum. Jacks convoluted way of presenting these concepts seems to upset a lot of people but within this maze are insights that ignite something for some people when they read them. For others it is gibberish. Go figure.
According to your own chart, you're in "Irreversible Failure" mode for "Inflamed Emotions" and "Poor Intellectual Processes."
Oddi, Appreciate your offer but no thanks. You, Hershey, and the rest of the A Team have zero credibility with me so I'm not inclined to waste my time forward testing a bunch of gobbeldygook that doesn't backtest favorably. You have zero credibility because not only does the A Team make fantastic unsupported claims, you have a penchant for dismissing valid concepts without reason. Which shouldn't come as a surprise because one can't dismiss a valid concept with reason. Backtesting is a great example. The A Team is quick to dismiss it, especially when some Grobian concept doesn't test out. According to Internet Guru Jack Hershey (with no auditable, public track record): "Backtesting is not a viable means for finding anything out. The reason why is fairly straightforward to determine. If you are backtesting something and you feel you have grasp the thing you are backtesting, then you have failed to really grasp what (the thing) is going on." Huh?!?! According to Hedge Fund Manager William Eckhardt (with a 20+ year auditable, successful public track record): "I know of no way to validate conjectures concerning technical trading without back testing" IMO, the average Grobian would side with Jack on this due to an overwhelming need to believe. Kind of like believing in apparitions of Christ on grilled cheese sandwiches. But I'm with Eckhardt because, not only does he have real credentials, his thoughts and philosophy mesh with my experience. So Jack proclaims that I'm stuck, a failure, etc. If insisting on objective confirmation is stuck, then I'm guilty as charged. Take something as simple and basic as the PV relationship which is easy to test. It didn't test out in 1999:Jack Hershey's Method Doesn't Work and it still doesn't. Now why is that? I think the author of that post hit the nail on the head: "Sorry Jack, your method doesn't test out. Statistically speaking, buying at 0 and 7 and selling at 4 and 3 **DO NOT** provide an edge. None of your scores are predictive. Period. Also, why can't you provide simple, straight-forward explanations? For example, instead of going into your elegant Boolean binary decimal mumbo-jumbo, why couldn't you simply have said: Overall score = (4*Price score) + (2* Volume score) + A/D score? The answer is because there's no meat behing your cryptic writings and you need the smoke screen to hide the lack of content." If you can argue these points with substance rather than faith, or show me ANYTHING of Jack's that DOES test out, I'm all ears. But I noticed that you didn't address my point about Bruce Kovner and Jim Simons from my previous post either. So let me ask you a variation of "where are all the customers' yachts?"... where are all of Grob's and the A Team's hedge funds? Trader666
Well 666, Then you will have to be written off as someone who simply wants to agitate, so this will be my last post to you. Fortunately, we do not require your stamp of approval to continue to increase our balance sheets. I cannot help but wonder if Spyder, or dawg, or easyrider, or nwbprop bothered to backtest this method of trading. Oh well, as I have been watching this group of traders evolve in real time, I guess the question is moot. I forgot to address the hedge funds. Perhaps the ego drive is not there to want or need to manage OPM. I don't know. I could easily ask the same question of you and others. It doesn't really matter that much in the grand scheme, however, now does it? Best of Luck Oddi
I didn't expect a substantive reply. So go ahead, run away and increase your balance sheet. LOL. As for me and the others re: hedgefunds, we don't make wild, unsubstantiated claims of trading prowess -- that's your realm.
Oddi I am truly glad for you. As Jack knows , I spent several years patiently getting to grips with his methods for equities and ES. I very much regret that I was unable to achieve any form of consistent profitability. It certainly wasn't for the lack of trying - I do not wish to imply that the methods cannot work - just that I, personally, was unable to achieve any consistency. If you or anyone would be prepared to enlighten me on a realtime basis then I would be delighted.
To understand Jack, maybe one needs to have multiple number of skills first. I think you have a rich background of diff. disciplines, and that somehow allows you to grasp his concept without bogging down in his verbiage, explaining his method from your point of view maybe is what doctor ordered. How about a short (hopefully) journal to show the iceberg, etc... preferably in YM or ES. But you take your pick.