85% of retail traders short S&P

[Xela]

it seems like you're calling for a book to be made 'illegal' because you didn't gain any value from it.

That typifies the kind of logic Q3D applies, on this subject.

In spite of the large number of us, here (and elsewhere online), attributing the successes of our trading careers partly or largely to Brooks' books, it isn't possible for anyone to say so, without Q3D making a guest appearance in the thread to call them "useless" (or worse: bizarre though it sounds, he sometimes even attacks Al's integrity, ethics and honesty!).

In a forum, there's very little censorship and members are free to express their views, and in this forum even when they do so maliciously and in the trolling style.

The sheer weight of numbers of people recommending Al Brooks' teaching predicates that people reading the forum regularly can pretty easily see for themselves what's going on, though, when he does this.

 

[Q3D]

"Almost no one talks about this stuff as a turning point to consistent profitability"

Perhaps we're both more susceptible to a bit of confirmation bias than we thought. It was a turning point for me.

I use Brooks for a basic framework to understand context, probabilities and edge, not for 5 min Emini trading. It's a model of thinking that allows me to determine what kind of market I'm looking at, trending, ranging or reversing; and then use that information along with a few insights from Brooks to look for edge.

I trade spreads, FLYs, Condors, boxes etc etc... usually on the 60 min or daily time frame. Along with lots of tape reading, time of day patterns and the structure of the markets around daily settlements and monthly expiries. So very different to Brooks.

It's a model, a way of thinking, not something to follow 100%. As a discretionary trader my job (in my head) is to refine and execute my current edges and develop new edges into strategies.

With my interpretation of Brooks' framework in place I can flick though 100+ different charts per day and in a few seconds decide if I think there's an edge. Then focus on the charts that stand out to me most. Again, very different to Brooks, but fueled by his explanations of context.

Good to see you have found something non-related to Brooks' 5 min ES theory that actually works. What Brooks claims in his for-profit books (not textbooks) to be able to do on the 5 min chart is much more difficult psychologically and analytically than higher time frame trading, it's difficult to tell if the ES is trending or not until the trend is possibly exhausted, or risk:reward is much lower than ideal, just by using the 5 minute charts with no indicators and you're setting yourself or your readers up to fail.

Regarding the issue of claims that should be illegal and atleast be seen as very unethical without CMT level III certification...It's remarkably myopic of Brooks not to write about the increased commissions from overtrading on lower timeframes, the increased risk of exposure to an HFT flash-crash, and the weakened risk:reward which results from a myopic 5-minute bar approach to the ES.

It sounds like you have a similar framework for chart analysis that most of the traders on forums and trading sites have, I don't think Brooks deserves most of the credit for that, just because he introduced you to price action, considering a lot of price action theory is pre 1950s with Elliott, Edwards and Magee, with many predecessors in the field going back to Dow in the 19th century and then Japanese futures traders in the 1700s.

If I were some very wealthy and succesful day trader I would be motivated to get into non-profit trading education or atleast donate most of the profits from it to charity, I know of a few seemingly-profitable trading teachers who do this, lack of it is a red flag imho.

 

[Q3D]

That typifies the kind of logic Q3D applies, on this subject.

In spite of the large number of us, here (and elsewhere online), attributing the successes of our trading careers partly or largely to Brooks' books, it isn't possible for anyone to say so, without Q3D making a guest appearance in the thread to call them "useless" (or worse: bizarre though it sounds, he sometimes even attacks Al's integrity, ethics and honesty!).

In a forum, there's very little censorship and members are free to express their views, and in this forum even when they do so maliciously and in the trolling style.

The sheer weight of numbers of people recommending Al Brooks' teaching predicates that people reading the forum regularly can pretty easily see for themselves what's going on, though, when he does this.

What is the "trolling style" and how have I displayed that behavior? You haven't shown how I am a troll or how I am "malicious", you just seem threatened (do you have a conflict of interest?) by me having an opinion opposite of yours, as though I am trespassing in threads because I'm not posting comments that confirm what you (and presumably Brooks) want to see written on this subject?

How is saying something should be illegal due to Brooks' lack of CMT III level certification and the inherent danger in his unsubstantiated claims imply malicious intent on my part? From my perspective it is quite the opposite.

 

[Xela]

It's remarkably myopic of Brooks not to write about the increased commissions from overtrading on lower timeframes

Before he gave up his medical career a couple of decades ago because he earned more from trading, he was a professor of ophthalmology and ocular surgeon, so it's perhaps more subject-appropriate for him to be "myopic" than it would be for most.

It sounds like you have a similar framework for chart analysis that most of the traders on forums and trading sites have

More bullshit: I've said nothing about the framework for chart analysis that I use.

What is the "trolling style" and how have I displayed that behavior?

By the obsessional regularity with which you behave like this, and by all the totally unwarranted and defamatory aspersions you've cast against Al Brooks' expertise, integrity, honesty and ethics.

In my opinion.

And I'm just as willing to give my opinion as you are.

As observed above (and in my in-box), people can see perfectly well for themselves what's going on here. But have the last word, by all means: knock yourself out.

 

[Q3D]

Before he gave up his medical career a couple of decades ago because he earned more from trading, he was a professor of ophthalmology and ocular surgeon, so it's perhaps more subject-appropriate for him to be "myopic" than it would be for most.





More bullshit: I've said nothing about the framework for chart analysis that I use.





By the obsessional regularity with which you behave like this, and by all the totally unwarranted and defamatory aspersions you've cast against Al Brooks' expertise, integrity, honesty and ethics.

In my opinion.

And I'm just as willing to give my opinion as you are.

As observed above (and in my in-box), people can see perfectly well for themselves what's going on here. But have the last word, by all means: knock yourself out.

I was a customer of Brooks' and IN MY OPINION I believe it is dangerous and socially irresponsible of him to run a for-profit educational endeavour without CMT level III certification and full transparency of his ES trades off the 5 minute charts. My experience is not necessarily indicative or demonstrative of anyone else's, but you should respect my right to exercise my opinion without defaming me or trying to assassinate my character and motives.

 

[Wingz]

For me it's about paradigm shifts and 'aha' moments that push my development on, I've read through quite a few of the books on the CMT reading list. Some multiple times.

Most of my big paradigm shifts were however from authors not on that list, like Mark Douglas, Brett Steenbarger, Mike Bellafiore, Bob Volman and Al Brooks. To my knowledge none of these authors have CMT III certification, or at least advertise it.

I gained lots of value from each author, took what worked for me at the time and discarded the rest or picked up on it after a subsequent reading.

Why not just discard what Brooks teaches as something that doesn't work for you and look for something else to connect with?

It seems like the CMT is a pretty arbitrary yardstick of value in my eyes. Especially when you start using it as a line between what should be legal and illegal in your eyes. Sounds to me like some bizzare book burning dystopian reality.

I've been where you appear to be, maybe not quite as extreme, its easy to get trapped in the rabbit hole. What you appear to not like about Al Brooks, his 'myopia' is what actually comes across from you in your last few posts. I mean, who cares? Just take a step back, reassess and focus on what works for you.

In my experience you have to be able to adapt and be dynamic in trading. Being inflexible in your beliefs about Al Brooks and all non-CMT stuff to the point where you need to have your voice heard on a public forum in an extreme way should ring a few bells.

-----
In fact just writing this now and observing the last few posts I'm sure I'm inflexible in certain areas and have blindspots. I need to start trading more markets and not get complacent.

This might be a bit of an argument the last few posts but thanks for bringing it more to my attention. You didn't have to be CMT qualified to add value to me.

 

[Wingz]

Dailyfx has some great data about what their traders are doing, what they're long and short. Retail traders tend to be range traders so they get short/long at top/bottom of ranges. They also tend to fight trends, so when a trend takes off, the retail traders will fight it. But what's interesting is that the crowd tends to be right and reach extremes at crucial bends in the trend, and right now an amazing 85% of the Dailyfx traders are short S&P. I think that means that we are near a top, or maybe not.

The ratio here is 85:15, so about 5.6 longs for every short.

I was under the impression that when the sentiment of retail investors was high or low it was usually a good time to go against them.

You might find this site useful.

https://www.sentimentrader.com

I think they do a free trial, so you may find some more interesting observations.

 

[Q3D]

For me it's about paradigm shifts and 'aha' moments that push my development on, I've read through quite a few of the books on the CMT reading list. Some multiple times.

Most of my big paradigm shifts were however from authors not on that list, like Mark Douglas, Brett Steenbarger, Mike Bellafiore, Bob Volman and Al Brooks. To my knowledge none of these authors have CMT III certification, or at least advertise it.

I gained lots of value from each author, took what worked for me at the time and discarded the rest or picked up on it after a subsequent reading.

Why not just discard what Brooks teaches as something that doesn't work for you and look for something else to connect with?

It seems like the CMT is a pretty arbitrary yardstick of value in my eyes. Especially when you start using it as a line between what should be legal and illegal in your eyes. Sounds to me like some bizzare book burning dystopian reality.

I've been where you appear to be, maybe not quite as extreme, its easy to get trapped in the rabbit hole. What you appear to not like about Al Brooks, his 'myopia' is what actually comes across from you in your last few posts. I mean, who cares? Just take a step back, reassess and focus on what works for you.

In my experience you have to be able to adapt and be dynamic in trading. Being inflexible in your beliefs about Al Brooks and all non-CMT stuff to the point where you need to have your voice heard on a public forum in an extreme way should ring a few bells.

-----
In fact just writing this now and observing the last few posts I'm sure I'm inflexible in certain areas and have blindspots. I need to start trading more markets and not get complacent.

This might be a bit of an argument the last few posts but thanks for bringing it more to my attention. You didn't have to be CMT qualified to add value to me.

One must make the distinction between trading psychology educator and trading price action educator, unless they strive to make an amalgamation between the two fields, as Brooks clearly neglects ( imho recklessly) to do.

Douglas makes it clear that he lost his house, his car, and everything else before becoming profitable and that he decided to write a book after 6 months of profitable trading. Brooks lacks this transparency. Volman makes it clear that this is a tight game, no large victories without large losses, that's not clear in Brooks' texts, (want me to quote this, to prevent me from hostilely being defamed as a troll again?)

 

[billyjoerob]

Look at this chart, the retail tradesr are buying at the bottoms and shorting at the tops. This is realtime data. Sentimentrader guy is using weeks old data that is a snapshot from a moment in time or is a survey. It's pretty useless.

 

[billyjoerob]

They bought more on the second decline than the first. It will be interesting to see, if we get a third retest of the lows, whether they are still buying.