Making JH' SCT and all his material alive

[Sprout]

Sprout,

You seem a smart and nice guy ... You might not be aware that the tone of your posts changed over time, in the same way spydertrader's and others' tone changed (in time, most of them proved to actually be just pretenders). I have no reason to doubt your good intentions, or claims, but I believe that the right thing to do now is to either share (in private) with wchpl something that can really help him, or to leave him alone. I'm sure it isn't your intention, but it is cruel to give somebody unfounded hopes, even when you don't misrepresent yourself.

As for pretenders, I don't really know of whom you speak. Everything that I’ve come across in the multitude of threads contributed to my discernment.

Fyi, before the beginning of this thread, I've exchanged over 30 pgs of private messages with Wchpl. In response to your previous public posted assertions that not all of Jack's work is published and that there are crucial elements that keep one from attaining any profitability with his methods, I've encouraged Wchpl to begin a public journal as an effort to keep things true to Jack's intent. He graciously took it on and since starting this journal has been public with his process.

Jack’s intent, from my pov, is the basis of PEP and only has three requirements;
1) Fulfill the promise of extracting from wall st to fix main st problems,
2) Do the work of MADA consistently, throughly and completely
3) Pay it Forward to other thinking minds.


@WchPl has experienced many a crux and has overcome them time after time. There were cruxes where how I was stating a distinction just didn't make a difference and that having others comment created the difference he needed to move on.

He certainly can speak for himself, my perspective and comments are all from my witnessing his process.

His determination, work ethic, perseverance and stamina are extraordinary. He deserves to receive the fruit of his labor - to be in the market and on the right side of the market at any given time with the feelings of support, comfort and confidence. The by-product of monetary rewards are life-changing but not nearly as much as the assimilated-into-your-bones insights on how liquid markets actually operate and how to profit thereby at any time, on any timescale with any market.

Would it require the same effort by someone else? Probably not, most likely different degrees of effort are required since we all come with our own morass that requires different degrees of untangling. An insight that might be easily seen by one could be incredibility difficult for another. We all have a unique lock for deeper and more encompassing understanding. The only person whom has the key is ourselves.


Perhaps this has more to do with your own understanding, assimilation and integration of Jack's work? If there is a problem, then look to see which of the three requirements one is not fulfilling.

Doing the work by starting a journal, posting a chart, filling in a log, requests for comment will make a difference; complaining about sour grapes much less so.

 

[baro-san]

As for pretenders, I don't really know of whom you speak. Everything that I’ve come across in the multitude of threads contributed to my discernment.

Fyi, before the beginning of this thread, I've exchanged over 30 pgs of private messages with Wchpl. In response to your previous public posted assertions that not all of Jack's work is published and that there are crucial elements that keep one from attaining any profitability with his methods, I've encouraged Wchpl to begin a public journal as an effort to keep things true to Jack's intent. He graciously took it on and since starting this journal has been public with his process.

Jack’s intent, from my pov, is the basis of PEP and only has three requirements;
1) Fulfill the promise of extracting from wall st to fix main st problems,
2) Do the work of MADA consistently, throughly and completely
3) Pay it Forward to other thinking minds.


@WchPl has experienced many a crux and has overcome them time after time. There were cruxes where how I was stating a distinction just didn't make a difference and that having others comment created the difference he needed to move on.

He certainly can speak for himself, my perspective and comments are all from my witnessing his process.

His determination, work ethic, perseverance and stamina are extraordinary. He deserves to receive the fruit of his labor - to be in the market and on the right side of the market at any given time with the feelings of support, comfort and confidence. The by-product of monetary rewards are life-changing but not nearly as much as the assimilated-into-your-bones insights on how liquid markets actually operate and how to profit thereby at any time, on any timescale with any market.

Would it require the same effort by someone else? Probably not, most likely different degrees of effort are required since we all come with our own morass that requires different degrees of untangling. An insight that might be easily seen by one could be incredibility difficult for another. We all have a unique lock for deeper and more encompassing understanding. The only person whom has the key is ourselves.


Perhaps this has more to do with your own understanding, assimilation and integration of Jack's work? If there is a problem, then look to see which of the three requirements one is not fulfilling.

Doing the work by starting a journal, posting a chart, filling in a log, requests for comment will make a difference; complaining about sour grapes much less so.

You and the others missed my point: it wasn't about the method's merits, or lack of, it wasn't about Jack's posts. It was about what's happening in this thread.

Again, it is ridiculous how you sound like spydertrader in his later posts on ET, mimicked by several others as well that eventually acquiesced not mastering the method.

It's cruel. After one year of hard work from wchpl, the right thing to do is to either give him something he can use now, or leave him alone. This can be done privately, as you might prefer.

Even in your last post you adopted the same tone of unjustified condescension and superiority. You should responsibly consider the implications of your posts, advice, and requests for wchpl as a person.

PS: In the spirit of full disclosure: Although my interjection isn't about that, and my posts where meant to avoid such subjects:
1. I know that Jack Hershey's original method (stocks and ES) can be used profitably.
2. I believe that all the ensuing iterations reduced the original method's beauty and applicability.
3. I believe that you just got carried away, with no malice.

 

[Sprout]

You and the others missed my point: it wasn't about the method's merits, or lack of, it wasn't about Jack's posts. It was about what's happening in this thread.

Again, it is ridiculous how you sound like spydertrader in his later posts on ET, mimicked by several others as well that eventually acquiesced not mastering the method.

It's cruel. After one year of hard work from wchpl, the right thing to do is to either give him something he can use now, or leave him alone. This can be done privately, as you might prefer.

Even in your last post you adopted the same tone of unjustified condescension and superiority. You should responsibly consider the implications of your posts, advice, and requests for wchpl as a person.

PS: In the spirit of full disclosure: Although my interjection isn't about that, and my posts where meant to avoid such subjects:
1. I know that Jack Hershey's original method (stocks and ES) can be used profitably.
2. I believe that all the ensuing iterations reduced the original method's beauty and applicability.
3. I believe that you just got carried away, with no malice.

It might be very well the case I've missed your point.

I'm still not clear whom you are referring to in 'mimickers not mastering the method.'

It's not my intent to be condescending nor proclaim superiority. I know what I know from the results of my own work and have documented that process since my first post on ET. I also know as Wchpl continues that he will receive the fruit of his labors. You're certainly free to think whatever you think, I have no control over that nor your emotions. May peace be with you.


On a personal note, I took my time with the material seeking more to assimilate and comprehend vs just following the convo along and/or just making through the end of a thread. I started at the beginning with PVT, programmed it and doubled my capital with it in an unbelievable short period of time. Most likely those experiencing some difficulty in his later work chose to not start at the beginning.

I also experienced all the negative feeling emotions that are possible from confusion to frustration to anxiety to anger to downright despair and everything in-between. When Spydertrader started posting in the other forum with asking questions instead of providing direct answers, I was pissed! At that time, I thought I just needed direct answers to what I thought were very simple questions.

It turned out to be not the case. By stimulating my thinking and deductive process, he gave me access to Jack's writings, which for the first two years was incomprehensible to me. I just stuck with it, basically letting the words just 'wash' over me - hopeful that something would stick. Eventually, as I continued, more and more of the concepts and principals did stick more so from doing drills and MADA.

I also appreciated everyone whom interacted with Jack, even the chronically negative detractors. There was a point though where my comprehension accelerated, it came around the same time as physically printing out threads into 3-ringed binders, using a #2 pencil and ruby red eraser doing every drill offered as well as compiling a very long ignore list (~400). The ignore list became necessary for some posters doubt just magnified my own. Since our time is limited, it's important to make a conscious choice of what to put attention upon, in my world, the realization of an ever-increasing equity curve doesn't leave much room for doubt. This is a world that I feel a deep appreciation and gratitude to Jack and Spydertrader and all whom participated in those threads for introducing me. They didn't have to share what was possible, nor put up with the un-relentless BS they endured. An overwhelming majority of the posters on ignore washed out anyway.


Your viewpoints are valid and they are more a reflection of where you are than anything about Jack, Spydertrader, or any other practitioner of the method, including me. I invite you to continue with Jack, everything he has spoken I have discovered to be true, even his most outlandish and unbelievable claims. It's really a 'you with you' issue even though it's currently framed as 'you with other' and 'you with group.' If you feel you can do better at transference, by all means - share to your hearts content and lead by example.

 

[baro-san]

...
Your viewpoints are valid and they are more a reflection of where you are than anything about Jack, Spydertrader, or any other practitioner of the method, including me. I invite you to continue with Jack, everything he has spoken I have discovered to be true, even his most outlandish and unbelievable claims. It's really a 'you with you' issue even though it's currently framed as 'you with other' and 'you with group.' If you feel you can do better at transference, by all means - share to your hearts content and lead by example.

You did it again ...

 

[Sprout]

You did it again ...

Whatever,...

... I declined to be trolled, no thanks.

 

[baro-san]

Whatever,...

... I declined to be trolled, no thanks.

Okay ... Bottom line: you're a pretender. You aren't profitable. And shame on you for what you did to WchPl!

This isn't trolling. I didn't troll you. And I was overcareful in addressing you. I was wrong to to so.

My original post:

I feel for WchPl. He really worked hard, and followed all the advice with docility. If any of you guys, who keep taunting him with evasive advice, have some heart, and the necessary knowledge, the humane thing to do is to give him now the relevant pieces of knowledge to be profitable, surely, in private; there's no need to unveil them to everybody. Or, if you actually don't have those pieces of knowledge, at least open to him about this, in private too; there's no need to unveil that to everybody. This isn't funny.

 

[Sprout]

Okay ... Bottom line: you're a pretender. You aren't profitable. And shame on you for what you did to WchPl!

This isn't trolling. I didn't troll you. And I was overcareful in addressing you. I was wrong to to so.

My original post:

Lol, whatever dude, the only person here pretending is you.

One would be hard pressed to find your posted results of a drill, a chart of your own work, a completed log nor post that demonstrate that you understand very much of the methodology.

You had the luxury of interacting with Jack while he was alive. The only person responsible for not getting it nor being extremely profitable from applying the methodology is you.

All you’ve added to this thread is doubt.

Troll away,...

 

[Simples]

Whatever dude, the only person here pretending is you.

One would be hard pressed to find your posted results of a drill, a chart of your own work, a log nor post that demonstrate that you understand very much of the methodology.

You had the luxury of interacting with Jack while he was alive. The only person responsible for not getting it nor being extremely profitable from applying the methodology is you.

All you’ve added to this thread is doubt.

Troll away,...

Maybe RDBMS just isn't his cup of tea!

Also to remember: Most folks called Jack a pretender. All the while he shared a mountain of practitioner info about trading and TA, the critics mostly just trolled and shared negative value.

Anybody can research and investigate (MADA), instead of being lead.
Sad for a lil' BM, Rev-disappointment, to derail the thread!

 

[Sprout]

<snip>
Lastly I just want to clarify that I have made 2 claims here.

1) Jack’s method has not proven to be binary by any stretch. I like to view it as a mixture of 80/20(science/art)

As a qualifier, "....not proven (to me) to be binary..."

With the above, it's important to distinguish boolean and binary. A boolean result can be expressed in binary notation. Jack proposed gathering datasets. The dataset itself can be composed of (lets use) the columns of a log. Each component being logged can be expressed in a boolean result as a binary notation. The dataset then can be assembled as a binary number which can be translated to a decimal notation.
ie.
000 = 0
001 = 1
010 = 2
100 = 4
1000 = 8
etc...

By doing this, one can prove to themselves the cycling of the market. Jack introduced this in PVT. One can see it's development in misc.invest.futures. Binary scoring can be applied to complex datasets.


The patent system would be another example of (science/art). To reproduce a patent is not as simple as following a cookbook. This points to the main distinction of whether one can reproduce the results expected of an advanced expert when they are being anything but.


2) If any system is binary and finite in nature one need not know how it came to be in order to implement it successfully

Well it certainly helps when the award winning cake recipe one is reproducing isn't producing an award winning cake. Anyone experienced in organic chemistry would have experience in the frustration that can come from the above. Some cooks are chefs, all chefs are cooks.


i have not found JHM to be strictly binary as being demonstrated by ANY of the threads.
there are MANY things that have been proven by myself to be SUBJECTIVE.some examples :

Which of the various interpretations is the truth?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_illusion


when does a lateral end ? : 2 closes, 1 close, a breach of high/low boundary, ibgs blah blah. using any one method of these is not binary since the lateral in hindsight can continue/or not.

This was the question that started my exploration into RDBMS. The answers I was given at that time were not satisfactory, not because whether they were true or false but because I didn't do the work to arrive at my own conclusions. In exploring this topic, after arriving at a particular conclusion, I categorized it as an 'operating point.' Operating points were open to iterative refinement and led to different conclusions and another distinct 'operating point' as my spectrum of differentiation increased.

It's an organic process that requires mind-building.

To use a metaphor of taking a trip around the world. If the ultimate destination is where one started then what was the purpose of traveling around the world? Jack's work isn't a cookbook and was never meant to be at least as it's perceived by the majority. It creates growth and changes in perception and an increase in one's discernment and capacity for logical reasoning. Consider the conscious mind can process ~40 bits of info/sec whereas the unconscious mind has been estimated to process ~ 20 million bits info/sec (depending on reference.) With Jack's methodology when approached thoroughly, methodically and completely; there is a true sports memory that gets built, the rewards of the market are just a by-product.

His body of work and writing style dealt more with cognitive development than anything else.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3767904/


B2B2R2B is always followed by R2R2B2R right? except for when there's a new pt 3 of course .

Again, not a complete understanding of the methodology. The above was stated at a particular point in time in a particular context meant for a particular class of people. The class of people I'm referring to is those with similar distinctions and at a certain level of development and discernment. It was meant to be applied as a scaffold or framework for further understanding. Jack further extended and refined SCT with RDBMS through iterative refinement. The above SCT distinctions can be further refined into 4 types of trends; complete and incomplete as well as failsafe and routine trends.
A new pt3 defines another distinct trading container, it can either be an accelerated one or a fanned one. In all cases another fractal has come into being.

As for your sentiment, the frustration is real and relatable. I remember statements similar to what you state that I initially approached as a 'truism.' Not understanding the context by when it was first introduced and by whom led to many a tangent. @Simples suggestion of starting first with Jack's writings gives one access to the source directly.


the FTT : anyone who has been around for a bit can cite multiple examples where not all channels end in ftt, and multiple ftts are sometimes present before a change in trend takes place.

There is only one ftt prior to the BO of the established channel. FBO and WWT would be applied to the others, but again this is an area that through iterative refinement led to the development of SCT into RDBMS. I know of the phenomenon you describe as a drift trend but have a different interpretation of it and without an annotated chart no progress can be made.


the DEGAP saga : if degapping was not done before 2010 i guess Jack and Spyder were just lucky every day on the open when they didn't degap using the wrong carryover for many years.

Iterative refinement applies again. Much like DNA, there are certain essential principals that have a multitude of expressions. This would probably get into a philosophical debate between creationism and evolution. The only thing I could add is the rise of ECN's and how they effected the markets and the ability to trade during non-RTH. Jack continued to evolved and refined his views of the markets to the end of his days.

Although I have much respect for those whom have been in the markets longer and more successful than I have as well as those whom have had the blessing to interact with Jack directly, I do recognize that unless one does the work and continues to adapt & learn with an open mind, mental fossilization is a real thing.

As for the ultimate success or failure of achieving transference of Jack's methodology and it's extraordinary implementation, that is and will always be within the sphere of control of oneself.

I appreciate you speaking up, we both just have come to different conclusions and results in our interaction with Jack's work.

Back to my corner…..

Comments within quoted text.

 

[Simples]

Part of the difficulty here nobody has grok'ed all of Jack's texts. Though there's a HUGE difference between reading 10 posts, 100 posts, 1000 posts, 5000 posts, 10000+ posts.. besides the work in between that should make the content more relatable in the mind. If something works, or not, for someone, it might be any part of the huge body of published work. The last inventions, like RDBMS, will require much more work than just implementing a KISS solution and work on rockets. However, the practitioner that must make it work, remains the same.

There's an unspoken mythology in the world: That results and success come for free, not from hard sustainable pursuit.
The actual pursuit and long hours are effectively invisible to others.
School and academia are not foreigner to long and hard study, for good reasons.