Hypostomus Tests Jack

Quote from BA_Trader:

he really only hammers a handful of high concepts when it comes to "making money"
More...

That may be true, though so far so one has been able to enumerate these "high concepts".

But while there may be something of value there, Jack also takes great pains to cloak whatever it is that he says in gibberish in order to make it far more difficult to understand than it needs to be. This persuades the reader to believe that there must be real gold here since he does not believe himself to be stupid and yet he cannot understand what's being said. It also makes Jack seem much more intelligent than he really is because, in order to talk about this stuff at all, he must obviously understand it, whatever "it" is.

If by "high" you mean basic, then perhaps. But there's nothing particularly difficult about basic concepts: price/volume, demand/supply, support/resistance, accumulation/distribution, trend.

Jack likes to ridicule anyone who doesn't think he's wonderful and goes to great lengths to present his views on how misguided they are, promising to illuminate the issue to subsequent posts which are never forthcoming.

You want to understand markets? Study Wyckoff, Neill, Livermore, Baruch, Magee. That's where the concepts are. Jack's just trying to accumulate admirers.
 
Quote from hypostomus:

... I have a four inch ring binder full of Jack intraday trading posts.
More...

Perhaps re-arrange the posts to ensure they have a correct sequence to be properly analysed/ understood. :cool:
 
...thank you for your ever-helpful suggestions. The opus forms a Gestalt, best understood, like Marcel Proust, by random reading, sometimes from back to front. But in fact my Jack Bible is ordered by the comprehensibility of the posts, starting with oracular and progressing to word salad. One gets the sense of a work in progress.
 
Quote from hypostomus:

...thank you for your ever-helpful suggestions.
More...

Of course you know that my suggestion was quite staid.

Thanks for your kind understanding. You're very welcome. :p
 
Here's a thought. If something proves not to work despite relentless tweaking and testing, then why not just scrap it altogether and begin anew with a fresh premise? Why attempt to keep a dead system alive by artificial means? As sad as it may seem, DNR does have a place.

I cannot help but be reminded of the tired, overpriced vacuum cleaners sold door-to-door which, unable to be sold on their vacuuming merits alone at an exorbitant price, were also fashioned to dry your hair and provide comforting heat massage. No doubt, the latest versions can also be used as home entertainment units, security devices and automatic weapons. (I think Welles Wilder would have been suitably impressed.) Bad analogy, but hopefully there is a point in there somewhere.

But then, I'm probably taking your thread too seriously, aren't I? :)
 
Quote from Thunderdog:

But then, I'm probably taking your thread too seriously, aren't I? :)
More...

Perhaps you've had too little faith in his words, nothing would be too serious to Hypo. :cool:
 
...I can tell that you are not a Jack alias from the absence of Jack-isms. I am perfectly serious, otherwise I would not have embarked on this series of tests.

But I must disagree that the method, whatever it is, is not testable. Work backward from the moment of entry in a trade. First there is that wiggle in your ass, like a cat preparing to pounce, which says "pull the trigger!". That is the final step in a strategy, it is the most important element of the strategy, and it can be coded and tested. What conditions preceded that irresistable action? Those are secondary criteria which are relatively soft in the strategy as to their actual values, and which can be estimated in the first round of testing.

That's why I picked TwoBarJack to test first. The setup is clear. He unequivocally stated that it works. It doesn't. That's a data point for believing other bold assertions. VDU/inside bar/BO was asserted to work. By inspection I think it should be faded, but I'll get to it eventually. Ditto for the allegedly preferred BO direction for an FTP or FBP.

What makes me keep my bullshit detector threshold low is that there are many Jack intraday approaches which I think are valid and which I have started to use. Perhaps those are your "high concepts". I'll take a crack at them:

- stay patiently focussed on the trade horizon represented by five minute bars

- note the predominant color of the high volume bars

- continually draw provisional trend lines and channels

- reverse on failures to traverse, or at the very latest in right hand channel line breaks

- scratch losing positions promptly, and be prepared to contertrend trade wide range high volume lateral channels

- stand aside in low volume narrow range consolidations

Is that what you have in mind?
 
...it had occurred to me that Jack gets paid to disseminate bad trading advice to keep the public stupid, not that that's a big challenge.
 
...not that I am defending Jack, but as an autodidact he did develop some ideas which I think are unique. For example, referring to trend lines as "left" or "right" is a particularly compact and useful description. However, like most autodidacts, perhaps he had a fool for a pupil.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top