My view on the jack hershey method
- Thread starter ProgrammerGuy
- Start date
- Status
I have no desire to run other people's money.
- Spydertrader
You assume I care if you believe me or not. I don't. If you don't believe the system creates profitiable trades (of any range or length) then simply stop reading.
Quite simple really.
- Spydertrader
I just want to say what makes these points so contentious is a combination of a) the work involved is very tedious and challenging, so naturally (regardless of validity) very few will explore it in enough depth to give it a chance b) it is hard to prove something without going down the path.
I think many of the detractors take a particular system, such as one or more of the Jack Hershey methods, and generalize that to their experience with other kind of similar systems. The "kind of" is the real catch, that could be the difference between success and failure in terms of goals achieved.
On the one hand, in my experience, the vast majority (95%+) of systems I've designed or learned from others do not work. On the other hand, I get the feeling from his posts, I think Spydertrader is the real thing, and has learned some valuable insight from Jack Hershey.
I will say I have looked at the material but not in near enough depth, but at first glance, some of the main points are related to elements my first mentor showed me, as well as ProfLogic. You can very vaguely definie them as a) find trend on large scale b) wait for opposite trend on medium scale c) wait for confirmation of large scale trend on smallest scale and enter. How you define trend is of course very complex in some cases, easier in others. My first mentor called this simply entering the pullbacks/retracements, ProfLogic calls it entering at the PPF (Price Failure), Hershey calls it entering at the FTT (Failure to Traverse).
To summarize, I don't think most people who criticise (or praise) the Jack Hershey methods are neccessarily in possession of sufficient information to in all cases make an accurate assesement.
The only truths I can see, with a minimum of research at least, is that a) envy is a very common emotion b) most fail at trading for a variety of reasons c) Jack Hershey and Spydertrader are trying to help others for free d) one of the traders (I forget his name, saw it in another post a few days ago) who seems widely respected on ET claims to have been trading using this methodology with great success.
I think that speaks very highly of Jack Hershey and Spydertrader, and I don't see anywhere that they promise this is easy. That said I have not read all the posts, again this is just my initial take on the situation.
Keep up the good work
I think many of the detractors take a particular system, such as one or more of the Jack Hershey methods, and generalize that to their experience with other kind of similar systems. The "kind of" is the real catch, that could be the difference between success and failure in terms of goals achieved.
On the one hand, in my experience, the vast majority (95%+) of systems I've designed or learned from others do not work. On the other hand, I get the feeling from his posts, I think Spydertrader is the real thing, and has learned some valuable insight from Jack Hershey.
I will say I have looked at the material but not in near enough depth, but at first glance, some of the main points are related to elements my first mentor showed me, as well as ProfLogic. You can very vaguely definie them as a) find trend on large scale b) wait for opposite trend on medium scale c) wait for confirmation of large scale trend on smallest scale and enter. How you define trend is of course very complex in some cases, easier in others. My first mentor called this simply entering the pullbacks/retracements, ProfLogic calls it entering at the PPF (Price Failure), Hershey calls it entering at the FTT (Failure to Traverse).
To summarize, I don't think most people who criticise (or praise) the Jack Hershey methods are neccessarily in possession of sufficient information to in all cases make an accurate assesement.
The only truths I can see, with a minimum of research at least, is that a) envy is a very common emotion b) most fail at trading for a variety of reasons c) Jack Hershey and Spydertrader are trying to help others for free d) one of the traders (I forget his name, saw it in another post a few days ago) who seems widely respected on ET claims to have been trading using this methodology with great success.
I think that speaks very highly of Jack Hershey and Spydertrader, and I don't see anywhere that they promise this is easy. That said I have not read all the posts, again this is just my initial take on the situation.
Keep up the good work
Quote from ptunic:
I just want to say what makes these points so contentious is a combination of a) the work involved is very tedious and challenging, so naturally (regardless of validity) very few will explore it in enough depth to give it a chance b) it is hard to prove something without going down the path.
To summarize, I don't think most people who criticise (or praise) the Jack Hershey methods are neccessarily in possession of sufficient information to in all cases make an accurate assesement.
Keep up the good work
Good balanced post thanks for that I too find it hard to believe that a person could put so much time and effort into something (without wanting recompense or trying to rip people off) and it not have any merit. I will be very interested to see what comes of the Hershy software project. maybe if they manage to distill Jack/Spyders work into some software it may make it easier for many to see the merit (or not) of the system. I wish them good luck
Anytime a process:
- takes voluminous amounts of reading
- is widely acclaimed by believers yet has large amounts of detractors
- lacks any kind of public record
- the man in question is known to have failed in his one public scrutiny with an apparent 26% loss to which he fails to respond
then the method can pretty much be considered highly questionable.
- takes voluminous amounts of reading
- is widely acclaimed by believers yet has large amounts of detractors
- lacks any kind of public record
- the man in question is known to have failed in his one public scrutiny with an apparent 26% loss to which he fails to respond
then the method can pretty much be considered highly questionable.
- Status