Quote from ammo:
while your at it, why don't you drop the jack love affair ,you've been folllowing him around like a poodle droppin turds in all his threads for at least 3 years,you apparently know how to trade but would rather offer up crapola to the et crowd than any valuable trading info,you just cant help yourself
i' an old dog, sticking with my present trading style, but jacks example is great for better entries...bring up the old news about jacks trading tournament and his friend is vintage nutjob, you, lying and asking for proof at the same time, this is a new low for youQuote from TradeWrecker:
neggative... Ammo I had never heard of Jack Hershey until he posted in this thread. So it's obvious that there are others out there who find him a little more than questionable. I just think it's sad that people don't require more proof... If you want to bang on the Hershey drum that's up to you... When you have some proof that you've made money with his work please let us know.
The path to acceptance is easy.... all you need to do is provide proof.
Quote from ammo:
i' an old dog, sticking with my present trading style, but jacks example is great for better entries...bring up the old news about jacks trading tournament and his friend is vintage nutjob, you, lying and asking for proof at the same time, this is a new low for you
odd that the crap you call one example on jack was from your previous posts on et under a million other aliases and the one you have now is new again,,your full of bs,a loser....heres your example of jacks volume spikes and a cover using it http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=64965&perpage=6&pagenumber=15533Quote from TradeWrecker:
Look captain save a snake... I'm not sure who you think I am but I'm not that guy. Regardless...
You say Jacks method is great for better entries. Where is your proof, please provide us with proof that you've indeed tested and tried this real time. Highlight for us in a statistically significant way how his work improved your Transactional and Market Impacts.
It's interesting that you dialed in on one example of the stuff I've researched on Jack and you took that and made an assumption. Is this how you also approach trading... You assume with no proof. This is why you're part of the problem. You're willing to support someone because you have a bias that matches their's or you have a bias against another person or belief... But at the end of the day old dog, you've not done your home-work. You've not applied any of the life lessons you learned elsewhere and now your just an old fool sitting around hoping for the best and picking fights just to be in it and be heard... You're fighting and arguing over something that you yourself have not even bothered to understand.
Quote from ammo:
odd that the crap you call one example on jack was from your previous posts on et under a million other aliases and the one you have now is new again,,your full of bs,a loser....heres your example of jacks volume spikes and a cover using it http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=64965&perpage=6&pagenumber=15533
Quote from TradeWrecker:
Hold on Mr. Know it all I can fix this quick... Would the ET staff please confirm that my IP is not the same as whoever it is ammo thinks it is.
Ammo... just for arguments sake, let's say I'm someone else. Whoever you think I am, Okay, I'm that guy... There. Let's get to the point.
Where is your proof that Jacks methods improve entry. don't show me a single chart shit stick... show me structured and rigorousness testing that you've done that supports it and clearly shows that this approach is better than a random entry. Then clearly show us how you've applied this in your trading.
let me guess... You can't. no kidding. You're just making my points by constantly skirting the only thing that matters. You and all the Jack Hershey Jock Straps can flap your jaws all day long but you're wasting air. The only thing I'm trying to do here, is get the lurkers who are following along to THINK.
Think about what I'm asking and what I'm saying, and look at the emotional responses it generates. Emotions don't make it right, you have to pull back, do real research and test. And, if you've done that don't you think you'ld be willing to present that research to back up your theory? If you're on here promoting a position which means you have no intention of protecting it, why not provide proof that it's legitimate.
Quote from outsource:
"The man is a master in his field. I recognise it.
However, so often in life, what happens is that no sooner does a genius appear, that all the dunces in the world conspire against him (Appolinaire).
I sympathise totally with the man and can only observe in wonderment how it is that he can persist in being so generous with his extensive knowledge despite persistent attack from everyone but the truly knowledgeable.
He is an old boy who makes his statements on a take it or leave it basis. I am sure he does this in the full knowledge he will be pestered with questions and criticism, yet he reveals everything, but it is so advanced that very few are able to grab it or to realise the worth of what he says in his posts.
I have often brought the risks in doing so to his notice, and that he ought to be more reticent and not discuss in public forums what ought not to be discussed in the way he does for everyone and his cat to read, yet he persists.
I must addditionally comment that his generosity in this regard is truly unbelievable."
I Agree 1000%