You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Objections to SCT
- Thread starter Joe Doaks
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Quote from doli:
The fact that Jack won't answer a simple question directly, clearly and unambiguously,
won't play well in the court of public opinion. He will be found in contempt.
You gotta be kidding. Nothings changed since Ive been on the board and as as far as I can see its been going on for several years. This exchange between Jack and others repeats ad nauseaum and nothing ever gets resolved. There is a serious attempt to decipher his teachings going on in Spyders thread and Im sure any serious question will be answered there.
Ah, someone else recognizes that Jack's "teachings" need to be deciphered.Quote from Bearbelly:
You gotta be kidding. Nothings changed since Ive been on the board and as as far as I can see its been going on for several years. This exchange between Jack and others repeats ad nauseaum and nothing ever gets resolved. There is a serious attempt to decipher his teachings going on in Spyders thread and Im sure any serious question will be answered there.
Windwalker is not MY sockpuppet. Maybe if we all post they'll think we're not watching and move the market.
So. I think if any millionaire SCT traders wanted to defend Jack they would have by now. By no means proof of a negative, however, because if I thought it worked I would slam it at every opportunity to dissuade others from using it.
I will take it that my first two objections are proved by default and move on.
Objection #3: "The war of fog." Five minutes is an unutterably stupid choice for primary charting for intraday trading. Sure, I have a five minute chart, but it's a small window for orientation only, and to make sure I don't miss S&R that I might not see on my primary chart. Which is one minute. "Guasians" are crystal clear in one minute. So are price reversals. You don't need an excel chart to PREDICT what volume is doing, you can SEE it.
And no guessing about what is going on INSIDE that INTERMINABLE five minute price bar. And those old-fashioned bars! Ugh! OK for mouldering old Charlie Dow, I suppose. But candlesticks are so much more informative. The truth of what I say is evident every day in Spydertrader's thread where the stoonts are constantly trying to peer inside those impenetrable bars.
So. I think if any millionaire SCT traders wanted to defend Jack they would have by now. By no means proof of a negative, however, because if I thought it worked I would slam it at every opportunity to dissuade others from using it.
I will take it that my first two objections are proved by default and move on.
Objection #3: "The war of fog." Five minutes is an unutterably stupid choice for primary charting for intraday trading. Sure, I have a five minute chart, but it's a small window for orientation only, and to make sure I don't miss S&R that I might not see on my primary chart. Which is one minute. "Guasians" are crystal clear in one minute. So are price reversals. You don't need an excel chart to PREDICT what volume is doing, you can SEE it.
And no guessing about what is going on INSIDE that INTERMINABLE five minute price bar. And those old-fashioned bars! Ugh! OK for mouldering old Charlie Dow, I suppose. But candlesticks are so much more informative. The truth of what I say is evident every day in Spydertrader's thread where the stoonts are constantly trying to peer inside those impenetrable bars.
Here is an attachment of the Objections to SCT so far.
About 2 dozen.
I left a space below each opne for anyone who takes notes.
If you are considering SCT this will be a good place to determine why not to give it any further consideration.
The OP is an example for you. He says his orientation is:
1. He adopted some parts of SCT and changed them around.
2. He operates on a 1 minute chart instead of a 5 minute chart.
3. He uses an alternative bar type.
4. He is operating on a beginner level for what he does.
5. He will not be posting any technical information because he wants to keep his apporach to himself.
6. He will not be posting any forward results because he feels that showing losses is not a good idea.
Many many traders do this kind of thing with SCT concepts rather than just follow the journal's learning process (just recently started).
Often people bring ideas to SCT and PVT; for example at least three mechanical versions of PVT exist. There is a lot of wealth lab chart scripting as well.
At this point it has been stated that the objections have been resolved by "default" and the OP is moving on.
Since there cannot be a technical nor financial representation of the objections for the reasons of the OP, it is not going to be possible to do a work out or work around on the first 2 objections. I would say objection 3 and so on will turn out the same way.
Thus the resolution of objections from a viewpoint of difficulties will remain as trading problems for the OP. That is a good way to reach resolution for him. For me, I would have rather seen the problems (objections) and worked them through.
Others have noticed that it does take time to get to be able to do SCT trading.
Manually, it requires:
1. having a display.
2. taking data sets
3. having a mental conclusion set in your mind
4. making a pairing of a data set to the corresponding conclusion
5. knowing the MODE of the market from the conclusion.
6. making a decision that matches the MODE
7. taking timing action to convert the belief decided to a behavioral action.
So this thread will be very informative for people making the decisions to adapt parts of SCT or to just go through the learning process either following the recommended approach or by self learning using any way chosen.
Natrually I am the chief beneficiary since I get to learn more than anyone else. I appreciate the substantive input as well as the input related to the learning efforts that have been made.
If and when anyone posts either charts or prints of their efforts, then we can get down to the details of doing the iterative refinements specifically needed to refine the manual aspects or the automatd coding aspects.
As I said before I am not presenting here but just being responsive to objections to the extent that they are defined.
If anyone posts their displays, then the improvements that are needed can be shown too. Custimarily I simply drop in to trader's operations and sit with them, do debriefing and the like. Here it would be done remotely.
This is not the thread for learning SCT; it is just the "Objections to SCT" thread.
You have almost two dozen objections attached and they can go along way for determining your specificc objections for not doing SCT. In just a couple of days we have gotten to the place where almost any one (the old 4 out of 5 people) can decide that SCT is not for them. This is a real shortcut away from what we do that allows a person to resume their efforts or maybe begin to look futher afield from where they have been in the past.
About 2 dozen.
I left a space below each opne for anyone who takes notes.
If you are considering SCT this will be a good place to determine why not to give it any further consideration.
The OP is an example for you. He says his orientation is:
1. He adopted some parts of SCT and changed them around.
2. He operates on a 1 minute chart instead of a 5 minute chart.
3. He uses an alternative bar type.
4. He is operating on a beginner level for what he does.
5. He will not be posting any technical information because he wants to keep his apporach to himself.
6. He will not be posting any forward results because he feels that showing losses is not a good idea.
Many many traders do this kind of thing with SCT concepts rather than just follow the journal's learning process (just recently started).
Often people bring ideas to SCT and PVT; for example at least three mechanical versions of PVT exist. There is a lot of wealth lab chart scripting as well.
At this point it has been stated that the objections have been resolved by "default" and the OP is moving on.
Since there cannot be a technical nor financial representation of the objections for the reasons of the OP, it is not going to be possible to do a work out or work around on the first 2 objections. I would say objection 3 and so on will turn out the same way.
Thus the resolution of objections from a viewpoint of difficulties will remain as trading problems for the OP. That is a good way to reach resolution for him. For me, I would have rather seen the problems (objections) and worked them through.
Others have noticed that it does take time to get to be able to do SCT trading.
Manually, it requires:
1. having a display.
2. taking data sets
3. having a mental conclusion set in your mind
4. making a pairing of a data set to the corresponding conclusion
5. knowing the MODE of the market from the conclusion.
6. making a decision that matches the MODE
7. taking timing action to convert the belief decided to a behavioral action.
So this thread will be very informative for people making the decisions to adapt parts of SCT or to just go through the learning process either following the recommended approach or by self learning using any way chosen.
Natrually I am the chief beneficiary since I get to learn more than anyone else. I appreciate the substantive input as well as the input related to the learning efforts that have been made.
If and when anyone posts either charts or prints of their efforts, then we can get down to the details of doing the iterative refinements specifically needed to refine the manual aspects or the automatd coding aspects.
As I said before I am not presenting here but just being responsive to objections to the extent that they are defined.
If anyone posts their displays, then the improvements that are needed can be shown too. Custimarily I simply drop in to trader's operations and sit with them, do debriefing and the like. Here it would be done remotely.
This is not the thread for learning SCT; it is just the "Objections to SCT" thread.
You have almost two dozen objections attached and they can go along way for determining your specificc objections for not doing SCT. In just a couple of days we have gotten to the place where almost any one (the old 4 out of 5 people) can decide that SCT is not for them. This is a real shortcut away from what we do that allows a person to resume their efforts or maybe begin to look futher afield from where they have been in the past.
Quote from Bearbelly:
My point is that there is no one capable of discussing SCT other than Jack and you cannot get any other answers out of him than what he has posted in the past so why bother. Name calling doesn't solve anything either.
Jack Hershey did not invent always in trading. Its been around.
The classic use of such "systems" as moving average crossover, MACD, SAR, is that the trader is always exposed and tries to catch the big trends at the expense of the "chop". Jack's implementation is to turn "chop" into a profit zone in addition to catching the big trend.
I have in the past traded an always in system. In fact I will reveal it here and now. You can backtest it and find that it was nicely profitable from 1996 until vix death sometime in the mid 2000's. Maybe sometime soon it will forward test as profitable again. It has its shortcomings and they have been "fixed" in other stuff I do now. It is essentially reversing on point 3's.
The method.
Identify the "right side" of the market.
Using a 5 min bar and a simple 9 period moving average determine the "right side" as follows:
The "right side" is SHORT when: The high of two consecutive bars is lower than the 9 bar avg.
The "right side" is LONG when the low of two consecutive bars is higher than the 9 bar avg.
The implementation is to start the day flat and look for the first "right side".
If the right side is long, enter at X distance away from the 9 bar avg. Hold the trade until the indication is given to reverse short.
The reverse to short is also at a symetrical X distance away from the 9 bar avg. In a strong trend, essentially the reversal occurs on the pullback, they are at point 3's in Jack's nomenclature.
I used to calculate the optimum X distance every 90 days or so and it usually was 1 to 2 points, or statistically about 1 standard deviation using bell curve distribution. If you have Tradestation you can optimize the X by stepping it from 0 to some number in .25 increments and come up with a useable number.
The strategy included a 3 deviations hard stop for those times when the market does not give a point 3 on which to reverse.
SCT is not new, but Jack's implementation is novel in that he claims to turn the chop into profit. There may be other ways to turn the chop into profit, but I don't see much discussion hereabouts on it.
Edit: The above example would have gone long at about 1415.00 at 9:00AM CST and would still be holding long.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.