how to understand Al Brooks

[zenemini]

Are these videos of real time price action as in you can see the price quotes & intervals changing on the charts in the videos or these are videos of static (hindsight charts) as in explanations on video about what has happen in the past ???

His video course in all hindsight charts as far as I have seen thus far.

Chapter 4 on Pullbacks. The complete definition is in a section of that chapter in big bold black print on page 118.

That is my point: Someone should not have to read ahead to page 118 for a definition of a term he starts using on page 22. Anyone interested in Brooks would be better off spending $349 on his video course rather than the $200 one would spend on his books.

Okay, that's fair. But retracements and reversals are fairly generic and are covered in most trading-related books that go into any specifics. It is the "additional refinements and flourishes" that make it your own and that form part of a comprehensive trading plan. So, apart from equivocation and obfuscation, what does Brooks bring to the table, in general terms, that any other of a long line of coherently written trading books do not? Serious question.

I'm not here to advocate for Brooks. His course would be helpful to those who learn concepts more easily from that sort of presentation. His course does have its main focus on day trading a 5 minute bar chart - there are not many books that I know of that have such a focus. I'm not saying that such books do not exist, but other than Brooks and Volman, I do not know of any.

As to the "flourishes and refinements" that refers mainly to my entry, stop, profit taking which is part and parcel of my trading plan. I have not seen that Brooks provides what I would consider to be a working trading plan. He also advocates entering on stops above/below bars. I almost alway enter on a resting limit order at a predetermined price level, and I pay no attention to "bars." My main chart is a 60 minute ES. This means my entry is often several points more favorable than a Brooks style entry. However, I am also entering with less "confirmation" than a Brooks trader. He does speak of measured moves, which I use, though he speaks ill of Fibonacci, which I use to great affect.

My overall impression is that his course is probably worth what I feel is a rather low price for such a course for someone who is either starting out cold, or someone who has been at this a while and thus far has failed. Trading isn't easy to learn. Brooks's course may be the means by which someone who otherwise will wash out might find what he or she needs. I am not advocating it, I am just saying that from my little experience with it, I would not attempt to dissuade someone from pursuing it. But his first book is garbage. And $100/month for a chat room without live trading smacks of snake oil sales to me.

 

[volpri]

Here is an explanation of the so-called little gem you discovered. As with Taylor you have to learn Mr Brooks style and how he expresses himself.

There is a two legged move down. The second leg is subdivided into two legs. You got H1, H2, H3, H4 because you got 4 legs. The larger second leg is divided into 2 smaller legs. Those legs have a L1 and a L2 hence bar 3 is a reversal up from the L1 and L2 shorting opportunities (of the smaller legs). Bar 3 is also a signal bar for a long entry H4 (from the perspective of the two larger legs down, including the short legs). That high 4 was made on the next bar after bar 3.

AM I STILL A DOUCHE?

Lol

 

[zenemini]

He didn't even read passed page 22. Chapter 4.

This is like a broken record. Page 19 was the first mention. Page 22 he mentioned these terms again. At that point, I was not going to plod through an already poorly enough written book where the author wasn't savvy enough to define his terms when first brought up. I have already said that I gave up at that point, so no ... I did not read the next 98 pages of tortured prose to find his definitions which belonged on page 19.

I have now given far more of my time to Al Brooks than he is worth, so I respectfully bow out of any further discussion here. Thank you.

 

[volpri]

This is like a broken record. Page 19 was the first mention. Page 22 he mentioned these terms again. At that point, I was not going to plod through an already poorly enough written book where the author wasn't savvy enough to define his terms when first brought up. I have already said that I gave up at that point, so no ... I did not read the next 98 pages of tortured prose to find his definitions which belonged on page 19.

I have now given far more of my time to Al Brooks than he is worth, so I respectfully bow out of any further discussion here. Thank you.

Well too bad you would not even attempt to look at the glossary where the terms are clearly defined. If for some reason or the other your fingers are too tired (or maybe too lazy) to flip to the glossary then yes, you probably don’t need to read Brooks.

Send the book to the basement or donate the book to goodwill or the local library. Just an idea..eh

 

[zenemini]

AM I STILL A DOUCHE?

Yes, yes you are. Obviously I saw that chart. I myself quoted that passage. But you cannot look at that chart and read that passage and glean the definitions of his garbage from the chart.

I'm done now with this thread (you posted this while I was posting my other "I'm done" post. But you asked me a question, and I didn't want to leave you hanging).

 

[zenemini]

Well too bad you would not even attempt to look at the glossary where the terms are clearly defined. If for some reason or the other your fingers are too tired (or maybe too lazy) to flip to the glossary then yes, you probably don’t need to read Brooks.

Send the book to the basement or donate the book to goodwill or the local library. Just an idea..eh

Holy smokes ... Are you Brooks? Give it up dude, the book sucks.

 

[volpri]

Well too bad you would not even attempt to look at the glossary where the terms are clearly defined. If for some reason or the other your fingers are too tired (or maybe too lazy) to flip to the glossary then yes, you probably don’t need to read Brooks.

Send the book to the basement or donate the book to goodwill or the local library. Just an idea..eh

FYI Brooks is plenty “savvy”. Perhaps you should become more persistent!

 

[volpri]

Holy smokes ... Are you Brooks? Give it up dude, the book sucks.

It is a great book! The trilogy that follows it are even more greater. The videos compliment all the books very well.

To find gold you gotta dig...dig..dig..my friend.

 

[volpri]

Yes, yes you are. Obviously I saw that chart. I myself quoted that passage. But you cannot look at that chart and read that passage and glean the definitions of his garbage from the chart.

I'm done now with this thread (you posted this while I was posting my other "I'm done" post. But you asked me a question, and I didn't want to leave you hanging).

Complainer

 

[Xela]

Page 19 was the first mention. Page 22 he mentioned these terms again. At that point, I was not going to plod through an already poorly enough written book where the author wasn't savvy enough to define his terms when first brought up.

I remember thinking things very like that, and quite a few of them, when I was struggling with his books, too.

Which is why, when discussing them and attributing to them, in significant part, my ability to earn a living successfully by trading - in which I'm far from alone - I always also mention that they're (a) badly written, (b) very badly edited (if at all: what you describe is exactly the kind of thing a professional editor should notice and remedy), and (c) really hard going and requiring great persistence.

I have already said that I gave up at that point, so no ... I did not read the next 98 pages of tortured prose to find his definitions which belonged on page 19.

That's completely understandable and reasonable, obviously!

Under similar circumstances, I'm sure I would have done the same, myself.

My circumstances, however, weren't similar: I was being advised by people trading successfully for their livings who were really insistent that I continue and make more effort. Which I did. And my experience - eventually! - was that they were right: I ended up glad that I'd persisted through all the difficulties. For me, it was eventually very worthwhile indeed.

I believe that now the video-course probably makes it quite a bit easier for most people.

But it doesn't altogether surprise me that in forum threads discussing this material, there are always people complaining. I think there are two main groups of these people ...

(i) People who've shared some or all of your experience, been very put off by it (perfectly reasonably!), and see no reason to spend $250/$350 for the video course, now it's available, fearing "more of the same"; and ...

(ii) People looking for "some simple system, that they can just copy fairly easily, and then use it to make money regularly" ... and however open and honest and direct Brooks is that that isn't what he's offering at all (and he's very open and honest and direct about it) those people are inevitably going to end up disappointed by it because they were hoping it would turn out to be something it never pretended to be in the first place (and let's be honest: many/most of those people are eventually going to end up disappointed by everything/everyone else too, because they're looking for something unrealistic - a "shortcut to income"!) - of course, I appreciate that you're not in this group, yourself.