I understand the need for a framework. I even have one of my own, such as it is. My question to Spyder was why Jack endeavors to make it inaccessible to those he is supposedly trying to help. The best teachers I have ever had in school were the ones who simplified concepts rather than convoluted them beyond recognition with verbal cabbage. So, my question is, if we are to assume for the moment that Jack is legitimate, what could possibly be the motivation for the manner in which he communicates with others here at ET?
Jack, "classical TA" is not "conventional orthodoxy". Maybe you don't remember coming out on the short end of debates with DBPhoenix, whose exit from here I dreadfully lament. The chart is littered with tests of S, R, BO, HOD, LOD, open, close, crowd entry, ad nauseam. Big fucking moneymakers for no brains at all.
Everyone wants to leave a legacy, and in order to leave one, a work must be shrouded in mystery and excitement. Refer to Amazon.com's #1 best seller "The Secret". I would not recommend pursuing SCT as a matter of efficiency in order to learn the markets, but Spyder is doing good work in streamlining, so if one has time to devote to that process, then it's all good.
I am tiring quickly of this petulance and recalcitrance. Getting on with it: Objection #5: Jack's postings some years ago referred to exiting any position open when the market enters what he calls CCC (gotta invent a new term for everything, guess a "pennant" wasn't descriptive enough). He said to wait for a BO with follow-through. NOW his mantra is "always in". I thought his previous position made more sense. But he never managed to my satisfation to define "follow-through" well, much less predict the direction of the consolidation BO before the fact. So sue me, I liked his earlier position.
Correct. We do hold reversals. you didn't take what you saw in your system as a reversal because that was only one of the three answers you had. we only have one answer and then as we hold we come to the next reversal. This is different than what you do. SCT really means seamless continuous trading. It stems from a template and thus is based on a synthesis of pricinples that always apply to the ball park. The trading is an activity that grows. By that I mean the profits are applied as they are earned and that takes a person to a dual system of the routine where the number of contracts come into play as just introduced by PTR. By runing at some multiple of the range (between 1 and 7) contracts are added steadily form the initial 1 contract. When you get to intermediate and a 50 contract Monday starting level you have to pause before going to expert contractwise. That is you trade as an expert at a 50 contract level and then when the "drilling" has built the mind, then and only then do you go on up to the T&S level of blocks and the four game strategy front running. I misunderstood the objection to SCT title. This is not a forum for dealing with objections, per se, to SCT; this is just another one of the weekly things people think up. At least people get to se the objections on the list and that will help them to not chose SCT. I am a consultant in many fields and oftern their are phases of getting corporations back on track that deal with "over coming objections". With the SCT orientation, if a peron is partially wrecked or wrecked, then there is no point in overcoming the objections he has created. With regard to people who are just getting inot making money. SCT and PVT are NOT mainstream things. The three people who represent an alternative are PTR and Lurker and the SCT/PVT crew. Being in the market all the time is a mind bu8ilding/ coding thing that cannot be accomplished from the traditional and conventional orientation. This orientation retlates primarily to the markets and their potential and NOT the gambling probability or wizetrade orientation. Crayola is the potential; the H-L is the stanadrd meaure and optimizing goes from less than 1 to 7 times the H-L. We stay far away from fear,anxiety and anger. and we focus on support, comfort and confidence. we have not invented anything because we partner with the markets. Sorry, I misunderstood the title. There really is no "overcoming objections in the business sense. This is just another play pen as usual and this is this weeks rendition. ciao.
Shudda brung some cavalry with ya, Jack. Where are all your supporters? Tick fucking down inside ever-narrowing, ever-slowing, ever-shortening channels this afternoon?
Joe, You're full of shit. This thread is just another pathetic rehash of your never ending beef with Jack. Thinly veiled, at best. But you're quite eloquent and well spoken. So i'll give you that. Take a long hard look at your quote above. Thats the foundation of Jacks method. BIG FUCKING MONEY MAKER. My interpretation of SCT? Basic TA kicked up a few notches with some magnificent tweaks (a la JH). I guess you haven't figured it out yet - some of Jacks incredulous claims picked up from suckers like you are meant to do just that -- give publicity to Jacks cause. Jack is great man. He shares freely to help others. On the otherhand, you would rather suppress, obfuscate and smear the messenger to protect your own interest. Ironically, this is Conventional Wisdom when it comes to Power and Control. You may be a good trader. But in my eyes, you're a small man. And Jack, a big one.
Achilles, thank you so much for posting. You will get no mileage here telling me I am full of shit. Everybody already knows that. But what of you, where have you been for the last 28 pages? Waiting until the level of discourse got low enough for you to jump in? Tell me something nice about SCT. You trade it? Make money with it? Dream about it? What? Or you just pop in for cheap shots on demented old men? And I have no interests to protect. I am a complete nobody, in case you couldn't tell. But one with half a brain and an exquisitely tuned bullshit detector.
I have a good news for you, in case you didn't know DB is at t2w board happily dispenses his wisdom to all.