You may sound intelligent and under control but under it all you're secretly a jealous and bitter man. Its very obvious my friend. If you werent, you wouldnt spend so much time here argueing about SCT. Get a life man, you're in dire need of one.
A similar mention was made on another thread... The idea markets are somehow 'controlled' by the whim of an elite cabal of market makers is seductive as it is juicy. But the first question that needs addressing - is it possible? I submit no. Why? Because the 95 - 5 winner rule doesn't synch with the composition of traders that actually make the market. Retail traders (dumb money) contribute roughly 5% of market value during a given interval. Conversly, institutional/fund/smart money contribute 95% of market value. Are we then to believe 95% of tradeable money chases the other 5% around all day to squeeze them? Seems, well, for lack of a better word, implausible. Further, why can't the majority of institutional players/funds -- those that are supposedly 'pulling the strings' --- turn a decent profit to save their life? Also, where do these market makers get near the infinite liquidity needed to commandeer price? Why does TA work, as you previously mentioned? Shouldn't market makers be eating my lunch at major S/R if this isn't their primary avenue for fleecing sheep? I like a good conspiracy as much as the next person. And I for one know humans are corrupt pieces of shit when money is involved. But Im a little lost here. Can you explain for me?
I actually found a picture of spydertrader, in the garb of a sock puppet, no less. Here is the link, scroll most of the way down. (There is also a picture of our inestimable Mr. Hershey, higher up on the page, of course). http://ibd.meetup.com/75/calendar/5393267/
Please don't be obtuse. I asked you why Jack communicates in the manner that he does. You essentially responded that his approach filters out a certain group of people. I merely followed up with concluding that he seems to "filter" out the people he does, apparently by belittling those who do not hang on his every word, by verbal cabbage and by making absurd performance claims that not even the most world renowned traders have achieved. I'm just connecting the dots. Have I missed something? Does Jack not do each of these things? Did I not ask you why he behaves the way he does? Did you not say that he conducts himself in the manner he does to filter out certain individuals? Where have I gone astray? And as for your hyperlink, I believe I retracted the single ill-chosen word in that prior post. Would you like me to apologize for that yet again?
Achilles, Doaks is well known paranoiac here. Pay him no heed. Clearly today he was not taking his meds. The plain truth is that federal and exchange regulations assure that fair and orderly markets are maintained for the fiscal welfare of the trading public and their fiduciaries. Any assertion to the contrary clearly is delusional.
from what you have written, I can see you are well versed in the intricacies of SCT. I suspect you might even have practiced SCT for a period of time. Albeit without success. I admire your valiant effort to learn, I only wish it had given you better result.
Tums, of the approximately fifty code-calculated results on my trading screen, exactly two of them are directly attributable to, and immediately recognizable as, bona fide elements of SCT. That's how much I liked SCT. Two fucking things out of all of it.
Now who is being obtuse. You clarified your comments in the post quoted below. I ask again, link to where you inferred, implied or even made an attempt to make even the slightest connection to Jack belittling of others. You even go out of your way to make it clear your inquiry involved why Jack makes things so complicated comparing Jack to former teachers who made things simple and clear. Now, you want to claim you meant how Jack treats others. Please, at least show some intellectual honesty and step out from behind the veneer of respectability if you plan to feed your own agenda by rolling around in the mud. Attempting to claim one thing when you so clearly meant another is almost laughable. - Spydertrader
I suggest that ACTUAL postings of fantastic results would attract more adherents than controversey. As to #2 the answer is to log into the chat room on ET and do some live calls which put the photoshop excuse to bed. No, there is a reason why JH doesn't show proof more in keeping with occam's razor. That reason has been put forth many times previously...............................