Al Brooks method

[kut2k2]

Is that the ACD method on your link? I don't get your point. Once again


I challenge anyone to show a "profitable price pattern" that can be tested and proven to increase the odds of a winning entry by over 50%.

surf

Your challenge is arbitrary and silly. Why a 50% increase? A 20% increase is quite significant and desirable. Given your insistence that TA is no better than random, any deviation from random is enough to prove you wrong.

As far as the link, how lazy are you? Just click it and find out what it is. The guy has a successful TA method. Nothing you say will undo that.

As far as the ACD thread, I challenge you to go there and diss TA like you do elsewhere. ACD is afterall just TA and you've made a big deal about all TA being no good. So take your balls out of smurfette's purse and be a man and tell those ACD guys what losers they are for believing in that stuff.

Nothing you say about TA from this point forward will mean a fucking thing until you find the balls to say it in the ACD thread.

Boom.

 

[Q3D]

That's hard to believe.

surf

Believe it. You already had this discussion. http://www.elitetrader.com/et/index...ks-trading-course.294140/page-28#post-4177429

 

[marketsurfer]

Your challenge is arbitrary and silly. Why a 50% increase? A 20% increase is quite significant and desirable. Given your insistence that TA is no better than random, any deviation from random is enough to prove you wrong.

As far as the link, how lazy are you? Just click it and find out what it is. The guy has a successful TA method. Nothing you say will undo that.

As far as the ACD thread, I challenge you to go there and diss TA like you do elsewhere. ACD is afterall just TA and you've made a big deal about all TA being no good. So take your balls out of smurfette's purse and be a man and tell those ACD guys what losers they are for believing in that stuff.

Nothing you say about TA from this point forward will mean a fucking thing until you find the balls to say it in the ACD thread.

Boom.

You are not making sense. 51% is 1% greater than random. Show me a price pattern proven to increase the odds of an entry being a winner by just 1%, You can't.

I looked at the AcDc thread-- Mav is a good friend of mine. What's your point??

 

[kut2k2]

You are not making sense. 51% is 1% greater than random. Show me a price pattern proven to increase the odds of an entry being a winner by just 1%, You can't.

You finally figured out how to word your challenge correctly. Anyway the link I provided does exactly what you demand. How lazy are you?

I looked at the AcDc thread-- Mav is a good friend of mine. What's your point??

My point is crystal clear to all but the deliberately obtuse. And you've made WRB's point. Your vendetta against TA is personal, and not remotely objective. If TA is as awful as you've claimed ad infinitum ad nauseum, then it shouldn't matter who started or has taken over a TA thread. That person is clearly misinformed and needs to be saved by your superior wisdom about the danger of TA.

I would think especially a good friend would want to save Mav74 from his own ignorance. Unless you're just a damn hypocrite.

 

[marketsurfer]

You finally figured out how to word your challenge correctly. Anyway the link I provided does exactly what you demand. How lazy are you?



My point is crystal clear to all but the deliberately obtuse. And you've made WRB's point. Your vendetta against TA is personal, and not remotely objective. If TA is as awful as you've claimed ad infinitum ad nauseum, then it shouldn't matter who started or has taken over a TA thread. That person is clearly misinformed and needs to be saved by your superior wisdom about the danger of TA.

I would think especially a good friend would want to save Mav74 from his own ignorance. Unless you're just a damn hypocrite.

You really are naive-- but that's ok. carry on...

But im still waiting on a single example of a price pattern to prove my hypothesis wrong. No, anonymous threads and anecdotal evidence doesn't count.

 

[kut2k2]

You really are naive-- but that's ok. carry on...

I'm not naive about you. You're a fraud. A stealth vendor who rails against other stealth vendors. Carry on.

 

[GiantDog]

The truth was he is the charity.

From what I can tell the donations go to the guys who run the site, not to Al Brooks. He doesn't run the site.

 

[GiantDog]

The same challenge goes to all TA price pattern believers.

I don't know what ACD is. Is ACD price pattern based? If so

I challenge anyone to show a "profitable price pattern" that can be tested and proven to increase the odds of a winning entry by over 50%.

Ask yourself how many moves or series of moves in one direction increase the odds that the next move or series will be in the same direction?

Without the answer, all of TA is nonsensical for active traders.


surf

Surf, you keep dodging the question. Why don't you grow some balls and go bash on the ACD Method thread? It's based on TA. Now go get em' tiger! Show us some muscle!

 

[marketsurfer]

Surf, you keep dodging the question. Why don't you grow some balls and go bash on the ACD Method thread? It's based on TA. Now go get em' tiger! Show us some muscle!

Because they don't make any ridiculous claims about its accuracy. Folks can trade however they want-- however-- as soon as claims are made--- I'll challenge the claims if they seem ridiculous.

 

[marketsurfer]

From what I can tell the donations go to the guys who run the site, not to Al Brooks. He doesn't run the site.

Wonder why the good doctor does not fund his own commercial enterprise? It's not expensive to maintain a simple site.