Objections to SCT

Status
Not open for further replies.
Quote from Joe Doaks:

Jack, again, not getting you facts straight. Nowhere have I EVER criticized PVT. That time frame does not appeal to me. Nor am I asking for anything. I have a mature NQ system that took me six years and about $15-16K to develop. It is in my experience original and unique. It incorporates elements of SCT which I have found to work for NQ, but with changes so radical that you would barely recognize them as SCT elements. I created this thread largely as an intellectual exercise because I was pissed off at the generally low level of the dialogue here re SCT. I am an engineer and mathematician by training, and the lack of precision and quantification and coding of SCT posters sticks in my craw. I am widely regarded here as a CFI, so who better to play Court Jester to SCT? And I am warming up for the inevitable endgame in Spydertrader's SCT thread. Don't think they aren't reading this. You do yourself no good with them by being obstreparous.
More...

the paradigm we are using is a template.

we recommend that you get it down cold with equities trading for a couple of reasons.

!. you build your mind.

2. the equities cycles are realtively slow and you do not get into fear, anxiety and anger as a consequence. Instead you get asupportive, comfortable and confidend environment.

3. the data sets concept sinks in during after hours and you espcape the "freakout" type single element of data type trading trap.


For people who have a science or math base (you are an applied type. A lot of coding goes on for a lot of reasons. It forms a template.

One example is the edjacent bars math (price) It starts with one coded set and adds the coresponding volume coded set. then the template is lifted and put on the leading commodity of what you are trading (NQ). Now you have four coded sets and you are ready to start the "logic" part of software where clocks and gating come into the picture along with persistence and pace and sentiment considerations.

This is the warm up stuff to get to the bigger picture of making money.

To b fair, I am being responsive to your intialtive entitled "Objections to SCT" It has the same flavor of the thunderdog thread that precedes this. Brfore thunderdog we got to deal with "objective reality" as the contrast to PVT and SCT.

So you have mentioned flaming by me and my being obstreparous. Fine.

we are just doing the talk.

once we get into the science of hard data and graphics, etc, then we will see where you are.

So far you are not getting down on any SCT stuff in any way.
 
Quote from Joe Doaks:

BTW, we have to the best of my knowledge heard nothing so far from other NQ traders. Wisely keeping their own counsel? No doubt! I hope they will dial in when I get to comparing SCT to classical TA.

Edit: Old men debating orthogonally! What a hoot!
More...

Try to be more engaging.

You need to be on the ball and get others involved.

It is not too important to show that SCT doesn't work for you.

What is important is to know why.

Once you explain what you are doing, then the others will be able to step in and help you.
 
Thank you, Bsparkyman. There are many reasons one would not want to post executions. I rarely do it because my reports show losses and (in retrospect) occasionally embarrassingly stupid trades, even though they are mostly net profitable. What if the great Joe Doaks had four $20 losers and one big (maybe lucky) "I'd better fucking quit now!" trade? (I'm talking about today, haha!) Not very conducive to attracting adoring followers. And I NEVER give up. If am down, I ALWAYS fight my way back. Sometimes it ain't pretty, and I make less than my broker. But you can bet your ass when I get one I'm proud of that was not at all obvious I'll post it!

(Of course, another reason might be that one doesn't trade at all! Or with play money. Or in the cool calm of sim. Real trading, like real sex, is nasty!)
 
Quote from Joe Doaks:

Thank you, Doli. I have been reading him so long that it went right by me. Specificity, Jack! Quantification! Perhaps if only one sentextion of a throng, even a miniscule pentalion, posted their support?

In his defense, else Liz will create a new alias and rag on me, I have been after Jack in at least nineteen guises for so long that we are locked in a death embrace. Unfortunately he doesn't enjoy it as much as I do. So this is payback. He trashes all my threads like I do his. But I do sense some defensiveness here. You see, he is as clueless about NQ as I am about ES. Uncomfortable position for an ET expert.
More...

I am going to be very fair with you.

You can see that I have been quite fair in every way so far.

You have objections. They relate to SCT.

If and when you get down to the precise math and science of what your objections are, they will be addressed in spades.

I am not here to provide anything except ways to improve trading results starting from the base line that you establish.
 
Jack, NOW who's asking for something? I have absolutely no intention of posting how I trade, other than the classical TA elements of it. Worked too hard for it. And not everybody thinks like you do? Stats? Routine? Debriefing? I could close my eyes, listen to the audibles, and trade the same. In fact, I have progressive vision problems (starting with not being able to see SCT, haha!) so I may one day have to trade blind (as opposed to stupid for most people). Stats is profit. Routine is wait for the coded indications to trip, hohum. Debriefing? It's in real-time. I am so fucking pissed when I make a mistake, or a code has an error, that I fix it on the fly.
 
Quote from Joe Doaks:

Thank you, Doli. I have been reading him so long that it went right by me. Specificity, Jack! Quantification! Perhaps if only one sentextion of a throng, even a miniscule pentalion, posted their support?

In his defense, else Liz will create a new alias and rag on me, I have been after Jack in at least nineteen guises for so long that we are locked in a death embrace. Unfortunately he doesn't enjoy it as much as I do. So this is payback. He trashes all my threads like I do his. But I do sense some defensiveness here. You see, he is as clueless about NQ as I am about ES. Uncomfortable position for an ET expert.
More...

help doli out.

You are informed and he is unable to do anyhing for himself.

Add the pertinent columns he needs so people can fill in the facts that he is seeking. This is a time to have first hand knowledge posted if a person chooses.
Soon he will have excel and google on his computer so he can get what he wants.

Everything can be quantified with respect to objections.

I used the appropriate words before in this thread it is "being fair".

At this point you are straying quite a bit form "Objectiions to SCT". Stay on topic and if you will just forget your past treatment of Liz and me. We do not care how you behave and treat others.

This is a public forum where you are hosting objections to SCT.

I am no longer on point for anything except bringing PVT up to expert in the Journal and later in the year sharing the tasks of bringing SCT up to expert.

Don't kid your self on my competence to use the SCT template.

Once you begin to put substantive stuff on the table, I will deal with your objections.
 
Quote from Trader666:

If I concluded that SCT works, not only would I use it, I'd defend it instead of criticizing it.

I, too, object to the lack of quantitativeness. And Jack, please spare me your sorry paradigm bull. IF SCT really does work, at least some of it would be testable.
More...

SCT works and it is testable right down to the finest detail as you will find out this year in an orderly way.

I am glad you are backing off on the testing; that is a good move on your part.
 
Jack, the best tonic for "fear, anxiety and anger" is absolutely unambigous rules, quantified, coded, tested. Which you ain't got. MY goal in trading is to be so bored I can trade on full auto and diddle my girlfriend at the same time. I don't WANT to SCAN. I don't WANT to have to PAY ATTENTION. I just WANT THE FUCKING MONEY. For as little effort as possible. That's one thing that leaves me so cold about SCT. You have made trading into WORK. I want my codes to scream, "Wake up and trade, dummy!"
 
Quote from Joe Doaks:

Thank you, Bsparkyman. There are many reasons one would not want to post executions. I rarely do it because my reports show losses and (in retrospect) occasionally embarrassingly stupid trades, even though they are mostly net profitable. What if the great Joe Doaks had four $20 losers and one big (maybe lucky) "I'd better fucking quit now!" trade? (I'm talking about today, haha!) Not very conducive to attracting adoring followers. And I NEVER give up. If am down, I ALWAYS fight my way back. Sometimes it ain't pretty, and I make less than my broker. But you can bet your ass when I get one I'm proud of that was not at all obvious I'll post it!

(Of course, another reason might be that one doesn't trade at all! Or with play money. Or in the cool calm of sim. Real trading, like real sex, is nasty!)
More...

LMAO! I lost $100 today. The method worked but the trader did not. I look brilliant like Jack when I would post my method on a chart at the end of the day. It is easy to look brilliant, it is easy to make claims, claims and methods posted like jack. My 6 year old can post and color and read and putt as and look as good as jack after the fact jack.

Good TRADING to you Joe, may you shoot straight and steady!
 
Quote from doli:

This is a little like a trial:
Anything you say can and will be used against you.
Lawyers don't ask questions that they don't know the answers to.
More...

That's right good observation.

Post the answers to your Q's when you get a chance.

Show links as well it will hepl others.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top