Ok, so in the end he says it helped him see something he didn't before. So your point is the jack hershey method is useful? I know, i've read multiple opinions while reading the 100s of posts, and have seen that the majority of people have gotten something useful out of it but couldn't quantify the method fully, so were ultimately disappointed. Whatever their results, it doesn't matter. I'm at 50/50 right now in thinking that it works. Like i said, the principle of trend channel following works. I just think the strategy lacks money management in a flat market and would like to see jack post an example when there is a whipsaw session. Regardless of those problems, there are things to learn, and if not learn, at least be curious about it. I have my own methods and have my own edge, working on improving it, i'm just in the process of collecting ideas and integrating them into my own system. I don't intend to follow anyone blindly. Like with most research topics, you expect a failure in the overall sense but my mind is curious and if i get some bits of insight for the different way of looking at things, i'll say i got something out of it. For now, the FTT concept is the only interesting thing, and it has given me an idea to construct my trend channels in various other ways also. Back on topic: I am still waiting for answers to my two questions. Anyone?
Nobody will answer your two questions, because probably they aren't proper questions for this method. There are 1000's of posts by Jack Hershey and Spydertrader dealing with various aspects of their trading approach. You have to really understand where they're coming from, and change the way you're thinking about trading: stay at all times on the "right side of the market". There's no prediction in the usual sense. There are no rules in the usual sense. All the 'indicators" and the "helpers" (including the leading price indicators) seem to have to be continuously scanned in order to allow you to decide at every moment the "right side of the market". At any time your perception changes, on the fractal you're trading, you reverse your position. From the many people who tried this and the few that credibly claimed to succeed, the conclusion can't be other than: not everybody can re-train his mind the way this method requires. Good luck!
BARO, Could you direct me to the documentation for those "few that credibly claimed" I assume the credibility comes from something other than after the fact ET posts. Thanks,
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/K8E_zMLCRNg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Answer for brain cell: A lot of software programmers have done what you are thinking about. Their performance for PVT is on record in many locations. Since you are a programmer, I can keep it brief and to the point. First, generate the compact program for the Hypothesis Set (HS) and it's Parametric Measures (PM). Basically review "inkind" as presented by Keynes. Then use the logic theory of Carnap. The market dictates that you work in Boolean Algebra. The tricky part is the Parametric Measures which you have NOT grasp at all. Try to understand that there is a key aspect of markets that has eluded almost all programmers and certainly all the quants and book writers. All market have granularity. This must be understood. If you choose to use market data, then you have to use the proper parametric measure. It is important that you be TOLD this so you can stop meandering around. If you "get it" then you can read all the posts and books and periodicals that show that NO one "gets it" and they are just making use of their acquired skills instead. Getting all kinds of training is important nut there is a caveat. The problems you choose to address dictate the applied mathematics of the situation. In markets, there is the special issue of when a mistake is made, you have to recognize it and backtrack to a point that is before your mistake. You have made a lot of mistakes and you may actually believe what you have done. The gerunds of the HS dictate the PM only and only if you are taking into account the granularity of the market. Deductively, only the pattern results on interlocking fractals. I am telling you that you have to use a velocity as the PM. Let me assume that you have studied science and technology. For this reason, you may not be able to calculate velocity in markets. Most likely you will make a big mistake. Your mind may be closed to the proposition that time is NOT involved. You have demonstrated this limitation so far in your life. Why do you think the earliest mathematicians who worked on building indicators for the markets used a six case method? They did not "get it." I know that people do not understand what I write, easily. It is an experience to have me as a prof or instructor. I allow learners to do as they wish and produce what they may. then we go through the process of examining their foilbles and take them off the table. In velocity there is a numerator and a denominator. You are incorrect in what you use as a denominator. From now on use 1 event as the denominator. 1 is the magnitude, the dimension is "event". See if you can eliminate your use of "time" as a dimension and the d of time. An object could have a velocity and it would be dx/dt for a given function in a given Alegbra. Usually the Agebra is the base 10 algebra. There is a different algebra for each different base chosen. As I said, I am difficult to understand simply because I am very knowledgeable and very thorough. You have not had such an experience before. You are very messy and clumsy when you deal with factual information. Markets operate as systems. Systems have three parts. My trading results in the system of the market and trader, yield results that people ignorantly joke about because they are NOT competent. So it goes. Q1. Begin with the smallest elements of the market: ticks and events. Deductively build the interlocking fractal relationship of the structure of the P, V system. The pattern emerges as the ONLY possibility. It has 100% probability and is 100% certain. If you make no mistakes and do not use your past series of mistakes. Q2 If you did Q1, then you have the events order straight. Notice that the P, V relationship for FTT and BO is perfectly precise and clear. FTT is a reversal and NOT a retrace AND volume is a Peak. The BO is a geometric occurance in the order of EVENTS where price is crossing a previously established velocity (the dx/dt kind) and volume is at a trough. now you may know, but probably not. Additional thoughts: Write out in your journal what a Peak and what a Trough is. Use the intersection of the two Parametric Measures in each case. This is where one measure ends and another begins, given the granularity of the markets. As you use Boolean Algebra the Algebra of the base 2, you notice, and Lucrim does not, that equations are NOT the rage. But logic sheets are. Or in your terms, logic sheets are represented by "programmer's coding". The 10 leading indicators are written this way and are found, for various codes, in a 270 page collection in a thread in ET. Lazy, lazy Lucrim. The structure of the system is expressed in seven feedback loops where each loop respresents the same logic in the form of the pattern's logic. Information is fed into this logic structure and the variables produce what-ever display arrangement is specified. This is the process of the structure. Most CW displays sum all of the volumes of each fractal, so annotating the volume has to be done with several line colors and line weights. There is some CW that suggests losing is part of trading. This is only true, if the trader is doing the CW myths and consequences. All of the financial industry is in this mistaken trap. Remember when Demi says: "the formula doesn't work." The corporation had a different objective, however (Sales). CW doesn't work and it is not a requirement of the financial industry. People who follow the rules all of their lives are overpowered by the CW of the financial industry. Ask your parents. The system results do not include losses since they do not exist in the system. The same is true for noise and anomalies. For making money, results what is don is to sum the events and the slpe of the container is the money velocity of each part. final note: drop FBO and use "fanning".
Your wish has been granted. Basically, were I you, I would chose to believe it doesn't work because it will save you a lot of time. As you can see there are a lot of P/L's posted by people who could not program the back test required (T666 is a mediocre example).
You can drop the assumption. I do not feel it would be possible for you to gain entrance to the more modern forums (electronic) that exist. There is a performance requirement.
You are correct. Work is a requirement. Work is not on your list of what matters. People who do the work just don't cotton to people who do not work. This may be like medical school, chef school, locomotive engineer school, law school, or other professions where doing work is the foundation of learning knowledge and skills. The financial industry is based upon sales and, secondarily, mantaining specific client turnover ratios. (Clients move after a while). This kind of trading is not a sales oriented or client retention activity. Full time trading is not a goal of our traders. It does not take a lot of trading to maintain a given lifestyle. all of this is oriented to working very hard so not much work is required. You may be skipping the first step because your time is too important to work. This trading is unbelievable to you so you should let it go at that.