how to understand Al Brooks

fordewind said:
you smoke weed?
More...
LOL

1802AA14-216B-443A-801A-9A3D7F072F09.jpeg
 
volpri said:
...Most here are probably not smart enough to understand mr brooks (that is why they call his writings gibberish and similiar names..) and if they are, they are not willing to put the time in to achieve such an understanding. And they certainly aren’t going to buy his video course (probably don’t have enough money after all their trading losses..ROFL). Best thing is leave em be. They will keep doing the same thing and getting the same results.
More...
Sure, bro. Let's get this straight. First the guy writes an incomprehensible book. And then, recognizing that he left most (all?) readers holding the bag, he sets out to clarify and simplify his thinking by...writing three more books for an additional 1,680 pages. How's that for clarity and simplicity? Because, if I remember correctly, the original rationale for his writing 3 more books was to make better sense of his first one.

Welcome to the scientology of trading.
 
Last edited:
Jeez, you'd think Al was selling "youth serum" to seniors over the phone. I've know Al for a long time, we traded together for the better part of a year in a small chat environment. I'v never seen his P&L nor do I care to but I can say that at the time he had a solid trade plan and he took his signals and observed the rules of the plan. The guy is smart, hard working, disciplined and focused. We went in different directions technically in about 2003 but remain in periodic touch.

He sent me a copy of his first book and like most of you, found it a hot mess but I do know first hand that a great deal of effort went into it's making. Look, a number of folks have found his work and ideas instrumental to their success, why not respect that. If you don't like what he's done, then leave it alone. The guy is the furthest thing from a con man.
 
speedo said:
Jeez, you'd think Al was selling "youth serum" to seniors over the phone. I've know Al for a long time, we traded together for the better part of a year in a small chat environment. I'v never seen his P&L nor do I care to but I can say that at the time he had a solid trade plan and he took his signals and observed the rules of the plan. The guy is smart, hard working, disciplined and focused. We went in different directions technically in about 2003 but remain in periodic touch.

He sent me a copy of his first book and like most of you, found it a hot mess but I do know first hand that a great deal of effort went into it's making. Look, a number of folks have found his work and ideas instrumental to their success, why not respect that. If you don't like what he's done, then leave it alone. The guy is the furthest thing from a con man.
More...
You have a point. But this is a forum for the exchange of ideas and opinions. I readily support and defend some books, and I criticize others. Why is a criticism less valid than an endorsement? Why can his supporters be more repetitive than his detractors? I don't know the man. I never met him. He might be a good guy; he might be brilliant. But I wouldn't know it from what I have read in his book. And it is his (first) book I am judging, not the man.

And that focus of which you speak? Why can I not find it anywhere in his book? However hardworking he may be, as far as his writing is concerned, he phoned it in. So why should I give his book more consideration than he did?
 
Frederick Foresight said:
You have a point. But this is a forum for the exchange of ideas and opinions. I readily support and defend some books, and I criticize others. Why is a criticism less valid than an endorsement? Why can his supporters be more repetitive than his detractors? I don't know the man. I never met him. He might be a good guy; he might be brilliant. But I wouldn't know it from what I have read in his book. And it is his (first) book I am judging, not the man.

And that focus of which you speak? Why can I not find it anywhere in his book? However hardworking he may be, as far as his writing is concerned, he phoned it in. So why should I give his book more consideration than he did?
More...
Fred, you should have your own investigative TV show. You would be one of those dogged reporters rooting out evil and injustice. :D
 
Xela said:
understandably and wisely, in my opinion - he chooses not to make evidence of it public (any more than can obviously be inferred by the visible reality that he long ago gave up his very successful career as an eye-surgeon to trade full-time because he found it better paid, more stable and more conducive to family life
More...
If he was indeed a "very successful" eye surgeon, he would have saved millions from his hefty annual income and could easily support himself clipping muni-bond coupons. The fact that he's able to pay his bills says nothing about his short-term trading prowess.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top