Duref Mudgins Invites Jack Hershey to Reminisce

[jem]

"Nothing is really difficult.

The pool extraction (PE) algorithm is an elephant in the room. grasping that money is made from price change and then looking at price change in markets in terms of the daily offering is simply a staggeringly large opportunity."

The call of the market guru/charlatan.

Just look at how easy it would be... you figure the baseball is moving 85 to 95 miles and hour. you have .5 to recognize placement then you modulate into action using my object vector directivity model.

At the end the ball lands in the seats. you do this every time you are up at bat. On average 4 times per game, 160 plus times per year. Over the course of a short 20 year span you have over 10,000 home runs.

anyone who does not achieve suffers from a small brain not open to my object vector directivity model.

 

[jem]

I will tell you why I read some of jacks posts - he is refining a con - sales pitch without doing anything illegal. I am not sure he is even taking money from any body.

This may be the most refined sales pitch for intelligent people we have seen since communism.

I had no idea how easily people can buy into perfect peformance or ideal scenarios - until I watched this guy in action.

It is concerning that I have even become aware of how well these tools of manipulation work.

This is a phd in the confidence game. imo.

 

[jack hershey]

I am glad to say that the shift going on to the PE algorithm is greater thanany time in about 50 years. Of course, you are regognizing the potentialaudience and how important it is to advance the transfer without hitches or me beinga bottleneck. I am being debottlenecked as we speak through process learning going on; it is taking me out of the picture by just overunning the limitations. I am sure as more and more tranfer occurs the track records of these many many people will be discovered as the passforward occurs all over the world.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



If it's based on process learning couldn't software be designed to train the user by running specific drills over and over? I don't know much about process learning, but I'm sure there's a way to accomplish it quickly by doing the processes at a high frequency.

Thanks,

TNG

You have stated in a nutshell what any learner may wish to do.

As you can see there is script all over the place for many platforms for all of the pieces.

One fairly interesting piece is the sweeps chart in nine colors. Use a four colored pen on the chart do do MADA cycles over and over for the 81 bars on the ES chart. We have four colored pens manufactured here and we keep slipping them out to whomever wants them.

Last week, Wednesday, we helped get a luncheon together (the third in the series.) The pens were used for filling forms and checks. About 27,000 dollars was put to work in about two hours by the use of pens on paper. The three points on the graph are 15,000, 17,500 and 27,000 dollars. Looks sort of like mold growing in a petri dish. Today is LTC at a residence for the elderly.

The computer has an upside and a downside relative to making money. It definitely is the source of all that is needed to do drills. Printing is one of the most important things it does. Filling in the 3 ring binder daily with the results of the daily drills (those that take care of doing the trading parts of MADA.) will eat up about 20 pages of paper a day.

Automating some drills too soon is a downside. I started out by doing my charts in pencil on a graph I designed (you will notice very few places sell paper designed for doing graphs manually. One really grat trader who still does it will be at the Trader's Expo again. He explains how it gives him a feel on the commodities he trades.

If a person does five years of 20 to 30 stock graphs a day by hand, he certainly can summer in Europe and drive any MB or BMW he desires.

As far as doing the MADA on stocks and SCT manually, it is the fastest way to expert (50 contracts doing 20 to 40 trades a day and taking the ES market offer totally).

In 6 1/2 hours a person goes through (from top to the continue point or the bottom where the change causes the Action trade) the sweeps chart several times a bar. He see the operating point migrate as he fills in the four pages (average) on his log.

This becomes the embodiment of "knowing that you know" at all times. Everything is binary so there are no IF's. Moving into the world of certainty is more swift if a person has no garbage. And it is true as we see here it is impossible for the mind to do it after a certain point of consequences of past decisions has built the mind into the CW algorithm.

I am doing the CD's pocket thing in the culling down of my writings. Tooling will be the emphasis. It will not be comparable to anything out there are as a reference for any presently proffered trading strategies. I have about a dozen fixes for the leading CW strategies as well; they are examples in a referential way for practitioners of the algorithm who came into the scene via these routes.

As has been seen the one page chart of PVT is just replicated 20 to 40 times a day on SCT using the sweeps chart for MADA.

Drilling MADA is done daily.

The P, V relation is unconscious and automatically available at every moment.

the binary vectors of MADE and Sentiment appear in every MADA cycle.

You have three finite sets that are composed of subsets each having sufficient binary elements to provide certainty and have no probabilities since binary math precludes this. By orienting to the null hypothesis to have the finite sets there is no Black Swan in the picture. There are finite sets for M, A and D of MADA. D has five elements and the two most used are HOLD and REVERSE.

Each lap of MADA ends and provide closure with certainty. Emotion s only related to M and the three emotions that interlock are support, comfort and confidence. If any fear or anxiety or anger appears it is a warning that the MADA is not being followed.

The algorithm shows that any excellent exit is synonomous with an entry; thus only reversals are used.

One drill that is apparently tough to do is the breaking of the entry-exit modus of those who are just assessing the algorithm. Often they use parts of the algorithm to refine their present mode of trading. But they stick with entering and exiting. Between these turns they are sidelined.

Emotionally they are not doing MADA but are doing an unconscious rendition of OODA where risk begins with D and lasts until the next D. Too bad. Risk engenders the emotions of fear, anxiety and anger according to testing paid for by the financial industry. D in OODA is the hypothesis of an inductive process. It is the CW definition of insanity. the ultimate betting scenario of how and why the financial industry cannot out perform the indexes and never will.

Fortunately, this makes this algorithm unbelievable and astonishing to those using or affected by the CW algorithm.

 

[romanus]

What a remarkably fascinating transgression from half-ass surface critique:

Quote from jem:

As far as 40-50 trades a day, I used to be one of those guys.

If you are taking 40-50 trades a day you to be fading premium and tick thrusts quickly. Real scalp like trades with excellent executions and very low costs.

There is way to much overlap on 5 min bars to use your technique of trading in the now and evaluating circumstances. The profitable corners on 5 minute bars are only there for split seconds. No one evaluating data sets to see where we are now is making 40-50 profitable trades a day. You will be stuck in the the middle of the bars.

As anyone who has scalped knows the really good entries have to be stalked and pre-traded. You do not have time to trade them in the now, you have to be trading them ahead of time.

How many 5 minute bars exist in trading day. How many have volume worth trading. How many have corners that you could pick off. Your methods will have you stuck in the middle of many bars and it will take many bars for you to make a few ticks if you are lucky. And what of all the bars that close against you.

to plagiarism accusation:

Quote from jem:

Many years ago when I read his book I found something that allowed me to make a lot of money with my trading style for a few years. In fact Jack hershey is currently teaching a laging version of the concept right now.

to venting out after drawdown:

Quote from jem:

This may be the most refined sales pitch for intelligent people we have seen since communism.

Classic B-team behavior!

 

[I am...]

Quote from jack hershey:

Your comments point out that you are bound (have a boundary) that is just totally ego centric. This is dumb, stupid and ignorant.

What has happened over the years is that an algorithm has been offered. If and when anyone decided to use it and pass it forward it turned out that the algorithm spread to other areas. In time copying was invented, the PC came into being, APL's were set up so produce software languages, and programming became part of formal ducation. The algorithm blended these things into it's use and passing forward. So you see practitioners, the system of the algorithm in many forms (mostly human mind poer and electronic); this is described as five generations of peoplein three words: "because we are".

As a consequence of this, the algorithm and its use becoming practical to 1 out of 5 people who consider it (See silly to complex polls which get the approximately same result), my persona became associated with the algorithm and that is where the first two words come from: "I am".

Doc used it as his theme with the Celtics for two years. His coaching mantra is that the team of individuals could come together and manifest a playing style and strategy that would exceed the competition. It does as you have seen by how the Lakers and everyone else before that were wiped out. the last game was a culminating manifestation.

For the algorithm, it is coming into it's own and is now global and in its fifth generation of users. as you see it is beginning to rub up against the CW and because the CW is deeply ingrained in the financial industry, the CW practitioners will always find safety in the CW of the financial industry. You are a stray example of ego centricity and you cannot entertain any thinking at this point just as 80% of those who look at the algorithm cannot. It is especially unsatisfactory to greedy entrepreneur types.

You appeared here, for example because of the overlap of the words that came from a search. without reading the thread you posted your mantra as yet another egocentric replay.

There is no connection between the african expression and your mantra.

I appeared here not as a result of a word search. Rather, I was minding my own business, passing over other forums on my way to the Politics and Religion area. Duref's headline called me in because it is essentially an invitation to communicate and remember. I am all about that. And where that is invited, there "I am". Plus, I know Duref to be humorous, not taking himself too seriously. I am all about that too since the world will end with laughter, because of joy.

Actually, I did read the thread and chose to engage with you at the point where you are most obviously inserting a mantra unrelated to the truth, sowing the seeds of confusion, making a boolean learning process a kind of salvation.

In fact, speaking relatively, a boolean process leads from conciousness to where all aliases appear to be in this time and place. Man descends not so much from a family tree but from a decision tree. You are advocating more of this process. Symbolically, we see hypostomus splitting into 18 aliases in reponse to your process...if only to take it less seriously. In the interest of making peace, I am inserting truthful mantras where your's are bringing division.

Jesus

 

[slacker]

Quote from romanus:

Classic B-team behavior!

Indeed. So Romanus. Do you believe the Hershey Method:

1. Always in the market?
2. Can produce 3 * H-L
3. Can turn $10K into $15 million in one year.
4. Can keep the trader from losing trades

Do you believe these core Hershey statements?

Why? Please, share with us how you have arrived at the place of certainty from which you post.

Thank you

 

[romanus]

Quote from slacker:



1. Always in the market? only if you want to trade all traverses
2. Can produce 3 * H-L is a function of market (type of day). It has been commented on before.
3. Can turn $10K into $15 million in one year. is a function of compounding, entering with size commensurate with experience level and ultimately the "pucker factor" associated with how one scales up
4. Can keep the trader from losing trades.depends on your definition of losing trades

 

[slacker]

Quote from romanus:
Always in the market? only if you want to trade all traverses
2. Can produce 3 * H-L is a function of market (type of day). It has been commented on before.
3. Can turn $10K into $15 million in one year. is a function of compounding, entering with size commensurate with experience level and ultimately the "pucker factor" associated with how one scales up
4. Can keep the trader from losing trades.depends on your definition of losing trades

Here is a small problem that I see with your reply. I will address one at a time...

1. 'only if you want to trade all traverses'

How do you know before the trade if you 'want' to trade that particular traverse? Did you 'want' to trade all of the traverses yesterday for example?

Thank you again

 

[romanus]

lagnflag=IQ28=T28

While I was "modding" I must of banned a hundred of his aliases in just a few months. It was pretty funny. I'd ban, like, 5 aliases in one nite and he'd get all pissy and whiny and post some crybaby shit - "You mods will never stop me from posting here!" Sometimes I'd ban him after just one post and that would really get him upset! He's such a tard, he's the absolute joke of the moderator's section, where we referred to him as "IQ28" because he's just so fucking dumb.

But alas, I tired of the game as it became like shooting ducks in a barrel and wasn't a challenge anymore since he was too stupid to make it one, so I gave up modding and went back to being just a regular member. Now I just ignore him, as I always have, as everyone here does, much as one would wipe dog shit off the bottom of one's shoe after stepping in a heaping, steaming, stinking pile of IQ28.

 

[romanus]

Quote from slacker:

Here is a small problem that I see with your reply. I will address one at a time...

1. 'only if you want to trade all traverses'

How do you know before the trade if you 'want' to trade that particular traverse? Did you 'want' to trade all of the traverses yesterday for example?

Thank you again

Traverses: dominant vs. non-dominant. One follows the other. Non-dominant traverses often present themselves in the form of lateral movement. DOM, OTR and STR/SQU are the tools. If using ES and YM one's better off sitting it out. Do you want to trade traverse that is moving sideways if you can't use DOM, OTR and STR/SQU? There's plenty of material that discusses all these concepts here on ET.