This looks a lot like the 1-2-3 reversal that Ken Roberts made popular with his incredible marketing back in the 90's.
View attachment 327053 View attachment 327054
Like Brooks, Roberts never showed personal performance results, and probably never used a computer to examine loads of data to come up with statistics to back up his advice. This too was a MTR for Roberts, a major trend reversal, the #1 point needing to be an annual high or low. Then, Roberts advised a
measured move from the reversal to some point at 50% of some other leg using the #3 point as a stop loss.
Roberts claims to have gotten this from a really old book that was out of print (in his marketing narrative) which, though never admitted, was probably Magees book (or possibly Darvas) available for $5 at any used book store. An idea which he then resold for $199 with money back guarantee with $2000 in-person seminars on the backend.
Sounds like Brooks recycles this, adding more technical jargon, as if to make it his own. Like Roberts, Brooks is/was a bar chart cowboy, watching charts (on paper or on screen) making trading decisions without the aid of computer analysis statistics, retaining all the golden gems of wisdom in his amazing brain full of pattern recognition .
Roberts also recycled a version of the Turtles trend following system, (a valid concept) and sold just these two patterns for just $199. At least Larry Williams, who also sold a $199 "course" in the same era, included several patterns, most of which were backed up with computer analysis for statistics.
The 1-2-3 reversal, if you just look at it, is simply the failure to make a higher high, and then drops lower than the last significant low, breaking the pattern of higher high, higher low....which is what a trend ... is. You can make money just from this much information but if anyone wants to kick me $199 I'll expand on that for you.
Btw, Roberts (and Williams marketing company) used to send out little booklets, fold over, very colorful for free. My marketing gurus suggested that should/could be sold for $29 if it included substantive information. But the $29 "lead" would lead to a $199+ "backend" which leads to another backend. I was taught to fulfill any substantive promises within the $29 product, making the $199 backend technically not necessary.