Duref Mudgins Invites Jack Hershey to Reminisce

Status
Not open for further replies.
Quote from romanus:

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.
More...

Thank you, now we are cooking with steam!!!

So if one trades all of the traverses, they are always in the market and will make 3 * H-L range net for the day. Or, should they avoid taking all of the traverses and only take the 'good' traverses that they 'want' to take?

Can you always be in the market and still only trade the 'good' traverses? This may be the key!!!

Have you ever seen anyone stay always in the market the way you describe and then net 3 * H-L?

Thank you again.
 
Quote from romanus:

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

to plagiarism accusation:



to venting out after drawdown:



Classic B-team behavior!
More...

I do not mind the critique. No drawdown either. Not trading that much, right now - which might be a source of frustration. In fact my comment about trading on 5 minutes bar was remarkably lucid and some of my better work here since I usually just type fast and go.

I just want to be clear - stating that someone is rehashing old techniques is not accusing them of plagarism. I almost never see anything new. Monitoring trendlines and volume is probably as old the rice market. Nothing wrong with advocating that approach. It is the rest of the sales pitch that is such a special treat.
 
Quote from slacker:

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
More...

1.) The image is one of reversals (think about what the message is trying to convey)

2.) Yes, it has been proven.

3.) 1 and 2 are not necessary for 3 (see attached)

4.) Yes

The attached shows how one trading plan for SCT (not including sweeping idle capital into PVT and SR) would exceed the goal.

It has some assumptions as inputs:

ES is primary contract (multiplier)
250 trading days
A contract ceiling of 100.
The operator has sufficient skill, experience, and knowledge to achieve, on average, < 1x (H-L) (.87 actually)
 

Attachments

Quote from ehorn:

1.) The image is one of reversals (think about what the message is trying to convey)

2.) Yes, it has been proven.

3.) 1 and 2 are not necessary for 3 (see attached)

4.) Yes

The attached shows how one trading plan for SCT (not including sweeping idle capital into PVT and SR) would exceed the goal.

It has some assumptions as inputs:

250 trading days
A contract ceiling of 100.
The operator has sufficient skill, experience, and knowledge to achieve, on average, < 1x (H-L)
More...

ehorn, thanks for the spreadsheet. The spreadsheet begs a question or two, is this a 'spreadsheet exercise'? How far along are you on its actual execution? 1 month, 2 months? You 'assume' 13 points every day so it is not real experience that you can cash a check on. Have you ever traded 100 contracts and got 13 ES points using the Hershey method?
Thank you,
 
Quote from slacker:

ehorn, thanks for the spreadsheet. The spreadsheet begs a question or two, is this a 'spreadsheet exercise'? How far along are you on its actual execution? 1 month, 2 months? You 'assume' 13 points every day so it is not real experience that you can cash a check on. Have you ever traded 100 contracts and got 13 ES points using the Hershey method?
Thank you,
More...

You are a silly little slacker... I think there is plenty enough information for you to digest already. P.S. In the future, chew your food a little better and it will pass quicker. :D
 
Quote from slacker:

Thank you,
More...
It's pretty clear by now for everybody that intent of your questions is sinister and that you have no interest in finding clarity in what you claim to be problem areas. Your rhetorical coercion attempt is quite transparent. At this point you have to admit to yourself that the linguistikally trained monkey, the B-team mascot, possesses unsurpassed ability for non-rational persuasion and leave the rest to the MPD carrier.
 
Quote from ehorn:

You are a silly little slacker... I think there is plenty enough information for you to digest already. P.S. In the future, chew your food a little better and it will pass quicker. :D
More...
Not a problem. I will take your response as a 'I was playing in Excel and this is what I got: no real trading involved.' (You may as well have entered 25 ES points a day, and traded 500 contracts and become a Hershey Hero!)

Too bad. But hey, I kind of expected as much.

All the best on a hot Saturday.

Enjoy the day!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top