Registering now because of the patent but for no other reason. I don't offer trading advice. If you want a good attorney, I can recommend a good one at the CFTC though.
I don't know why you feel it necessary to resort to verbal abuse and sarcasm. I stated what I felt was a valid criticism. I am not Duey from Utah, whoever he is. And I do have access to your website, and have spent many hours studying your materials. I came on board when your newsletters were still focusing on the 777 tick charts with the short and long ERG's etc. I don't recall offhand, but I'd guess I've been reading your stuff for about 3/4 year. This is what I feel, and yes I would hesitate to say this to you personally, without the veil of an alias. Does this say something to you -- that I would hesitate? Maybe if you look at how you handle criticism (by getting abusive and condescending) with some honesty, you will understand why I would not say this to your face. If you read what I wrote, you would see that although I did indeed have some negativity about your "system," I do in fact feel that I gained a lot from studying it. In fact, it helped me to "trade with the trend" like I never had before. I stopped fighting, and learned to flow. I am grateful for this. What I find regretful -- and you're welcome to respond to this -- is that I find you have a need to throw around the impression of perfection, when it is not there. Bill, it's okay that the system isn't perfect. The markets aren't perfect, and no attempt to encapsulate them could come even close to perfection. I have discussed this issue with other students who feel likewise. The "Program" trades you post on your website (http://www.logicalmarkettrends.com/2005 Program.htm) can, IMHO, not be duplicated following your system. You say that they are taken based on a "completely mechanical" system, in which case anyone trading the system should get identical, or extremely similar, results. If someone had the talent (I don't but the system is relatively simple and it shouldn't be that hard) to program your system into Tradestation, one should be able to reproduce the results found -- if the system is completely mechanical. You are fond of issuing challenges, so here's a challenge: You have, I guess, more than 100 students. Some of them must surely have tried to program the Logicmaster system (on the 777 tick chart or the 343 volume chart or the 98 tick chart or whatever chart) and back/forward test. You claim that, to date in 2005, the system has produced a total of 1,765 points ($88,250!) per contract, while only losing 3 points! Perhaps "beginner" students have a hard time "seeing" all the setups, but a computer, with its computational power, should have no problem doing so. So can you reproduce a computerized "mechanical" system that can make 1,765 points per contract this year while only losing 3? If yes, wow! If no, why not? A completely mechanical system such as Logicmaster is easily given to hard set rules. I don't deny that you make money as a trader -- you may or may not. Unless you show someone statements, I guess we'll never know. I take issue with you saying that 1) Your system, as you post its results on the website, is completely mechanical, and can be duplicated. 2) That you have not changed the rules -- you have, and not just from ticks to vol. When I came on board, you traded exclusively off the 777-tick chart. When students sometimes questioned how you got in or out of trades earlier than they did, you said that you were using the 98-tick chart for precision; but only sometimes. I never quite understood how one knew when to enter the trade based on an early signal from the 98-tick chart, and when one waited for the signal off the 777-tick chart. This is an example of the "subjectivity" of which I spoke. It used to be that trades were only taken in the direction of the slow ERG on the 777; now the slow ERG isn't even mentioned. 3) I wish that you responded to the content of the criticisms, instead of just getting angry and dismissive. 4) You say you have nothing to sell, yet it seems to me that since "only attendees of the seminars will be given subscriptions to the website," that in fact you are selling something; not a website subscription, but a seminar fee in order to see the "subscriber only" section of the website. Please, correct me if I'm wrong. I'm very open to stand corrected on any or all of these issues. Please don't call me a liar, as I've tried to be as honest as possible. If you feel I've been misleading, show me how, and I will take it back. If other students of Bill feel I'm wrong, tell me why; I will not stand on ceremony. I have gained much from your website, and I feel the $300 I spent was a great investment. But that doesn't prevent me from calling a spade a spade.
Why would having a patent application, or having an actual patent, or several patents have anything to do with registering as a CTA? Thank you,
Proflogic, If you post trades on your website and then cannot back them up with statements for even a partial period then what you are doing is fraud in the eyes of the CFTC. Now that you have closed your site to those who do not sign up for $3K seminar is another 'bait and switch' type of strategy (scam?). If folks who pay up $3K are still not in clear about your system and truth, then better be ready for some heavy artillery type action from someone disgruntled. There is worth to your system no doubt, but in this blood business of trading only real time real money trades hold water..........rest is Elliot Wave type half a promise! Jeez! I never heard someone in my adult life who would have 1700 odd winners and only 3 losers and is still not threatening Warren Buffet or George Soros. Guess you are even better than the good old Gann!
That's funny, a friend of mine had almost exactly the same comments about proflogic as Duey. He said the posted trades are an absolute "holy grail" joke. We all know there's only one way to do this.............post trades in real time for a whole week.............but you won't, because we'll all see the great and amazing OZ behind the curtain.
I wish the thread did not go to the sh-ter here but I guess it was inevitable. You brought up some legitimate points and many of these questions would seem to be rather reasonable in the context of using the method especially since you paid for the information. One thing that of course did not seem right is the rather inflated winning percentage of trades. The other contention seems to be about actual entry prices. Of course in hindsight it is easy to find the turns and the reasons for the turns but can it be reproduced in real time --I do not know. That would be one thing I was trying to get an answer for from a current user of the method. Based on what you said in your post that seems to be one of the points where traders are having problems. The trading ideas and trade trend direction seem to be objective but the actual points of entry and timing seem to be rather subjective which can be in a window of 1 to 4 or 5 points which can cause a trader to succeed or fail using the method depending on how they pick their entry point. If this is incorrect someone please let us know and give a short explanation of how the entry points are not subjective.
The use of an alias says a lot. I progressed from using Tick Charts to Volume Bar Charts in March of this year and my students were fully aware of the change as early as May of 2004 and the reason . . . to replace the variable tick with Volume bars for increasing the accuracy of reading price. My entries and exits were ALL taken from a 98 tick chart prior to using Volume Bars. I taught students to read price incrementally. First to read price direction and then to read your entries and exits. If you cna't grasp the concept of the fluidity of price movement you will never understand the entries and exits. You are a perfect example of that. I can almost guarantee you do not have access to my site now. Otherwise if you had spent "many hours" studying the materials you have been aware of the profesional writer I brought on to clarify my rules, all the improvements to the explanations of the rule based system, the successes of my students in the chatroom and the creation of a perfect flow chart to show the flow of the process. No one is ever going to match the program trade because it runs 24 hours a day but I have over 20 of my students send me the SPECIFICS of entries, exits and times the set-ups occured before I posted them on the site so how can all those people perfectly duplicate a subjective method? It is only necessary to consistently take a piece of the program trade results every day to be comfortably successful. Just because you could not "figure out" my method doesn't mean others who have fully focused on the physics of it couldn't.