Why do you guys need me to keep your threads alive? Jack didn't post to your thread for over 30 days until I posted taunting him about it. So here's another favor.
Mozart? You're not actually comparing Grob to Mozart, are you? Please don't desecrate Mozart! If you really believe that, I sincerely and respectfully suggest that you print out a few thousand of Grob's posts, along with your Mozart reference and seek professional help. If Jack is remembered for anything in 200 years, it will be as a huge HOAX. Just search Usenet you'll see that he's been stringing people along with the same song and dance for YEARS. More like John Titor than Mozart. If Jack's stuff works, then why did nwbprop go down the tubes with all of Jack's personal coaching? The most bizarre part was when nwbprop attributed his results to other factors... P.S. I nominate Richtrader for moderator of the year... one less grape kool-aid stand!
$5K to $200K in two years? Come on easyrider! A quick search of your posts that contain the word "rocket" suggests otherwise. For example: 04-05-06 06:32 PM easyrider wrote: "Rockets have brought down many a trader. LOL. They are momentum trades, breakouts, usually at or near the high or low of the day. Volume will help to keep you out of trouble but many rockets fail. In fact I think more fizzle than blast off so you must cut your losses quickly, or, with practice, get out flat.(wash trades). I suggest extensive paper trading before risking any money." I'd be a lot more enthusiastic about something making me over 600% a year. 04-24-06 11:44 AM easyrider wrote: "... I washed out of the rocket but did not reverse as per my plan. I just cant seem to get out of my edger mentality. If I had had some coin to play with I probably would have tried it." No coin? What about the $200K?
I compared you and your likes with the mediocres that are on a mission to bring down those that do / know / can more than them. Obviously even Salieri is well above you. You're so blinded by your frustration, envy and hate that you couldn't understand even this simple parallel.
hm - i think this entire neverending nonsense can very easily be debunked. if this "concept" would work - and not only that but would produce those expected results - which are - to say the least - lightyears away/above from what the best traders in the world are able to achieve consistently (*) - then tell me - why are those who believe so - or even claim they trade this way - so aggressive? somebody who is extremely successful or even one of the best in the world does not act his way. this is a fact. (actually those clown's behaviour reminds me of those moslem fanatics in the streets of teheran or wherever). why are they still here at all and react to posts from people who dont believe it and sometimes ask some critical questions? and above all - why do those people who claim to trade these methods still have regular jobs? pretty obvious... (* it's well known that 10-15 pts. per WEEK long term is an extraordinary performance - achievable after years and years of experience. here we have some college smartass newbies who think they can make 30 pts. per DAY right away any day - 'cause the "market offers it" to them - so to speak...) [btw.: those who don't like my opinion - put me on ignore PRONTO - you are too stupid to accept the truth]
I get so tired of repeating this. It is trivially easy to parse Jack's intraday futures method into rules, albeit fuzzy. If you bother to test each rule individually, you will find that they don't work. Yet we are expected to believe that the ensemble average exceeds the expected value.
This coming from someone who PM's that he did not go to college nor speaks english as his primary language. That is like the folks who tell me their is no distinction between a community college degree and ivy degree, or a ford and benz. I bet you wouldn't say these things to my face since I'm definitely a physical type of person. Unlike most, perhaps even you, I have integrity. I contribute everywhere, whether it be my community, work, family, etc... It is not a half assed contribution neither (ie. show up for one day). Bill Gates is one of the wealthiest guys on the planet and yet to this day, he plays a role in MSFT day to day. Same with the Stanford honchos at GOOG and Steve Jobs... I guess if someone put up half a billion dollars for you to put to work, you would simply leave in the middle of the job to pursue your own goals. That is like going into a war and not finishing the job. So you see that your rational and like most things that go on is unbelievable to you in addition to being off the marke! Mind you, I'd say that right to your face and watch to see if you would try to say something under your breath... Yeah, the PRONTO action is in order for you too... TRUTH... LOL! What do you know about truth??? Not too much according to your posts... You're the heresay type of person who doesn't bother establishing (as opposed to finding) the facts... MAK!
If Grob wasn't Mozart in your analogy, who was? Please enlighten us. Do you believe in the Great Pumpkin BTW?
Here's a quote from William Eckhardt who not only was the quant behind the Turtles, he has also VERY successfully run hedge funds for the last two decades and still does: "I know of no way to validate conjectures concerning technical trading without back testing" And NONE of Jack's stuff tests out, yet his A Team simply prefers "to believe." Some go so far as to claim that backtesting is invalid. What's the logic behind that... I believe the Hershey method works despite proof to the contrary, therefore the proof is invalid? Back to backtesting... you're mistaken if you think a system can't be broken down and tested by component. If an entry method tested with time exits can't do better than random entries, why not just throw darts? Why spend all that time watching for conditions to set up if they don't put the wind at your back? That wind can be precisely quantified with time exits. Can you objectively argue this point? Where are Jack's hedge funds BTW?