Quote from NoDoji:
Trading price action the way Al Brooks teaches in his book/course is similar to taking the algebra, trig, and calculus of price action scalping. He starts from an intermediate level and works to a very advanced level. I now trade in a way that's even more intricate than the stuff his book/course covers because I continued to hone the methods I learned from him. I may be really slow, because it took me over two years to get to where I am now and to fully understand every concept in his book.
Seriously this is a bit exagerated.
I do believe that EVERY trading course would teach a student something... but comparing this to a math course is completely exagerated. If I was to advise a student between taking a degree in mathematics or taking a 2-3 years course of AlBrooks, I am sorry, but I would advise the student to take a math degree.
I think it is completely
immoral to compare trading courses to mathematics degrees.
One can say, they like the course : fine.
One can defend a course : fine.
But no need to make completely irrelevant comparisons.
Also, not every successful trader trades chart patterns at La McGhee Style ( no matter how the names are changed) combined with candlesticks at La Steve Nison ( no matter how simplified or the names are changed). Then add to the spagetti bolognese, some Elliottwaves at the candle levels 1-2-3 then 1-2 ,
and once in a while throw in some 50% fib retracement extensions...
and add the cheese of 1 indicator ( moving average), and now you can add more cheese with 3 indicators ( 3 moving averages).
Et voila!
There are many ways to skin a cat in the market...
hmmmm... I am thinking : every trading educator should have a go at the combine. What about that?
I have to say, I am at my demo-combine number2 as I failed the first one.
