You may sound intelligent and under control but under it all you're secretly a jealous and bitter man. Its very obvious my friend. If you werent, you wouldnt spend so much time here argueing about SCT. Get a life man, you're in dire need of one.
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 Joe Doaks:
If ANY method skews the trading balance so that the "public" (market order traders) make the "insiders" (limit order traders) net unprofitable, that method WILL be faded. If you are old enough, remember all the things that once worked. Of course, we can always hope, like Achilles, that they will work again, if only we live long enough.
A similar mention was made on another thread... The idea markets are somehow 'controlled' by the whim of an elite cabal of market makers is seductive as it is juicy.
But the first question that needs addressing - is it possible?
I submit no.
Why? Because the 95 - 5 winner rule doesn't synch with the composition of traders that actually make the market.
Retail traders (dumb money) contribute roughly 5% of market value during a given interval. Conversly, institutional/fund/smart money contribute 95% of market value.
Are we then to believe 95% of tradeable money chases the other 5% around all day to squeeze them?
Seems, well, for lack of a better word, implausible.
Further, why can't the majority of institutional players/funds -- those that are supposedly 'pulling the strings' --- turn a decent profit to save their life?
Also, where do these market makers get near the infinite liquidity needed to commandeer price?
Why does TA work, as you previously mentioned? Shouldn't market makers be eating my lunch at major S/R if this isn't their primary avenue for fleecing sheep?
I like a good conspiracy as much as the next person. And I for one know humans are corrupt pieces of shit when money is involved.
But Im a little lost here. Can you explain for me?
I actually found a picture of spydertrader,
in the garb of a sock puppet, no less.
Here is the link, scroll most of the way down.
(There is also a picture of our inestimable Mr. Hershey, higher up on the page, of course).
http://ibd.meetup.com/75/calendar/5393267/
in the garb of a sock puppet, no less.
Here is the link, scroll most of the way down.
(There is also a picture of our inestimable Mr. Hershey, higher up on the page, of course).
http://ibd.meetup.com/75/calendar/5393267/
Please don't be obtuse. I asked you why Jack communicates in the manner that he does. You essentially responded that his approach filters out a certain group of people. I merely followed up with concluding that he seems to "filter" out the people he does, apparently by belittling those who do not hang on his every word, by verbal cabbage and by making absurd performance claims that not even the most world renowned traders have achieved. I'm just connecting the dots. Have I missed something? Does Jack not do each of these things? Did I not ask you why he behaves the way he does? Did you not say that he conducts himself in the manner he does to filter out certain individuals? Where have I gone astray?Quote from Spydertrader:
I don't recall saying those the words you appear to have attributed to me. In an effort to refresh my memory, could you kindly link to where I did? Also, since I must have missed it, could you link to where you asked me about Jack belittling others and making outlandish claims? I seem to have missed that too, and wouldn't want to once again misinterpret another accidental poorly chosen word.
- Spydertrader
And as for your hyperlink, I believe I retracted the single ill-chosen word in that prior post. Would you like me to apologize for that yet again?
Achilles, Doaks is well known paranoiac here. Pay him no heed. Clearly today he was not taking his meds. The plain truth is that federal and exchange regulations assure that fair and orderly markets are maintained for the fiscal welfare of the trading public and their fiduciaries. Any assertion to the contrary clearly is delusional.
from what you have written, I can see you are well versed in the intricacies of SCT. I suspect you might even have practiced SCT for a period of time. Albeit without success.Quote from hypostomus:
As a complete ousider in this matter, standing aside as it were, if never too far, I would wish to offer a brief retrospective on these goings-on.
The true-blood Southerner is never found very far from sedition. So I must wonder now how many of the present class of accolytes was peeking here. And how many will now sneak looks at one minute charts, exclaiming "Oh, my Hershey, look at what goes on INSIDE a five minute bar! There be friggin' in the riggin'!" And how many will surreptitiously draw their channels from the right side first, making provisional left sides therefrom. And which bad boys and girls will be reading up on intraday support and resistance and drawing faint lines only they can see, wondering WHY strong runs end in seemingly empty space. Poor Spydertrader will be rapping knuckles right and left: "Behave yourself and recite one hundred Hail Hersheys!"
I admire your valiant effort to learn, I only wish it had given you better result.
haha.
Give me a book title. I want to read it.
Give me a book title. I want to read it.
Tums, of the approximately fifty code-calculated results on my trading screen, exactly two of them are directly attributable to, and immediately recognizable as, bona fide elements of SCT. That's how much I liked SCT. Two fucking things out of all of it.
Quote from Thunderdog:
Please don't be obtuse.
Now who is being obtuse. You clarified your comments in the post quoted below. I ask again, link to where you inferred, implied or even made an attempt to make even the slightest connection to Jack belittling of others.
Quote from Thunderdog:
I understand the need for a framework. I even have one of my own, such as it is. My question to Spyder was why Jack endeavors to make it inaccessible to those he is supposedly trying to help. The best teachers I have ever had in school were the ones who simplified concepts rather than convoluted them beyond recognition with verbal cabbage. So, my question is, if we are to assume for the moment that Jack is legitimate, what could possibly be the motivation for the manner in which he communicates with others here at ET?
You even go out of your way to make it clear your inquiry involved why Jack makes things so complicated comparing Jack to former teachers who made things simple and clear. Now, you want to claim you meant how Jack treats others.
Please, at least show some intellectual honesty and step out from behind the veneer of respectability if you plan to feed your own agenda by rolling around in the mud.
Attempting to claim one thing when you so clearly meant another is almost laughable.
- Spydertrader
Quote from Spydertrader:
Jack posts in such a fashion to filter out individuals who by their very nature expect things to be handed to them. Unfortunately, posting in such a fashion runs the risk of 'filtering out' (at least initially) many unintended individuals (myself included). While certainly lending itself to attack and often vehement disagreement, Jack could end the entire discussion by posting a few prints. However, he knows 2 things occur once he does that. One, the controversy ends (and we all know how much controversy generates interest on this web site), and 2. Some still wouldn't believe it and we'd have another argument over 'photoshopped results.' As a result, Jack allows the controversy to continue - going on now 8 or 9 years online.
I've seen both his prints and his hand drawn charts from years ago - back when Jack had to hand draw his charts. Now, I don't say that to 'convince' anyone of anything. I point it out because Jack will at some point insist people witness him trade live once he knows people are doing the work. As a result, Jack has one goal in mind, to help people who need it, but only those who he thinks will do the work.
That's just the way he is.
He and Liz are both extremely generous people with both their time and money. While I don't expect anyone to take my word for it, their generosity remains no less real because some people think the old man is off his rocker. Nothing could be further from the truth. He might like to make you think he has gone off the deep end, but at 73 he hasn't lost a step.
Good trading to you.
- Spydertrader
I suggest that ACTUAL postings of fantastic results would attract more adherents than controversey. As to #2 the answer is to log into the chat room on ET and do some live calls which put the photoshop excuse to bed. No, there is a reason why JH doesn't show proof more in keeping with occam's razor. That reason has been put forth many times previously...............................
- Status
- Not open for further replies.