Tell us how you really feel. I suggest you go back and re-read my post. Not complaining. Are not all opinions valid as you stated? If his system works for him great. Is this the answer for everyone? No. We all should be open to learning ie what works for everyone. Whether it be stoch or whatever. btw Im on the same boat that nitro, inandlong, and oldtrader are on -- lacking indicators. We must be sinking. Bickering. It's a sure sign the markets are tough.
Jack there is absolutely nothing in my mind that is worth highlighting in the spew of yours...HAHHAHAHAHA 12.5 per ct / per session huh? Jack you are full of shit
Lobster, an example would be, let's say the market is in it'e usual quagmire at 894-897. Your chart shows heavy resistance at 901 and light resistance at 906. You just sit back and wait for the batlle at 901. If the Bulls win, you join their victory parade to 906 and go AWOL until that battle is fought. If the bears somehow win, you can then march with them all the way back to 901. We want to be heroes, not mercenaries. Just don't make too many friends along the way, because they will be your enemies on the return march.
in plain English, one more time -------------------- From: dkm (davidmarshall@nospamhotmail.com) Subject: Re: Question for Jack Hershey View: Complete Thread (23 articles) Original Format Newsgroups: misc.invest.futures Date: 2003-02-08 05:50:43 PST My interpretation of Jack's earlier posting regarding the use of stochastics to trade ES is as follows: Level 1 - "rockets" - fast paced long and short trends Stochastics set to 14,1,3 Long when fast line breaks above 80. Exit when fast line breaks below 80 Short when fast line breaks below 20. Exit when fast line breaks above 20 Look for fast and slow lines to be entwined above 80 or below 20. Mentally block out the 20 to 80 zone. Target: $30,000 per annum Level 2 - slow trends plus rockets Stochastics set to 5,2,2 Go long as fast line breaks up through 75. Exit as fast line breaks down through 25. Go short as fast line breaks down through 25. Exit as fast line breaks up though 75. Do not look in the 25 to 75 zone for this method also. Do not reverse. (Will do later after capital tripled). Target: $60,000 per annum Level 3 - reverse on slow trends instead of just exiting. Target: $90,000 per annum Notes: Need to distinguish between fast and slow trends. Rockets (fast paced trends) end in congestion. The stochastic signals go to the middle where congestion "lives". If congestion, low volatility and low volume occur, lines become entwined at 50%. This is the "sleepiest" condition. If not at 50, it is going to BO on the opposite side. Congestion ends with a BO. We then get either a slow or fast trend. Jack, please correct me if this wrong. David
Nope... I use indicators, ma's and macd specifically. They work great for me. And it appears that stochastics work great for you. I began the thread out of curiosity as to what people meant when they said they traded by price action alone. Are you saying that you consider yourself one who trades by price action alone and you do it by incorporating a stochastic? Either way, you have started an interesting discussion about the use of the stochastic indicator, so I will split your posts off to a new thread entitled, 'The Stochastic Indicator." Thanks for your posts.
Jack's setting was wrong, he is not skill in typing here is correct one > > Stochastic (5,2,3) with lines at 75% and 25% > > Stochastic (10,2,3) with lines at 80% and 20% > > Stochastic (14,1,3) with lines at 80% and 20% > > MACD (5,13,6)
He needs to be more systematic and use less jargon. What he talks about is sound and not necessarilly very new to me. I have used stochastics in a similar way as a means to gauge the strength of the market. One of the setups I use, not on a regular basis, because I trade mainly systems, that utilizes stochastics was mentioned in the thread 'Good entries for newbies'. I don't want to repeat it here, because that's not important. What is important is that you can use stochastics in more than one way and certainly in other ways than it was originally designed to be used. Jack seems to have some experience in this matter, so it would be good if he presented his ideas in a more organized way, preferably in a new thread. This thread was meant for something else, anyway. I ask those who want only to criticise to stay away from this new thread.
I would not call it 'the proper' use. It is more original than what you can find in most or perhaps even all TA books, but you can use stochastics in more than one way and none of them is more proper than the other. For instance, the stochastics divergence is still a good way to use this indicator, and it is by no means less proper than what Jack does. Let's not abandon good things in favor of just new ones. The new things are not always better. They only are different.