Quote from ProfLogic:
You would make a good reporter for the "Enquirer".
Allow me to clarify things for you. I make No Money trading. I'm actually a hair dresser living in hills of Arkansas with delusions of success. There is no one on the face of this earth that uses my Methods successfully. I am currently being paid by market surfer aka hank rollins aka whomever & nononesense, to pertetrate the myth that trends exist so unsuspecting traders will invest their hard earned money into the market to inflate it so hank and his friends can fade their trades.
On the fact side. My worthless method is the same today as it was 4 years ago just fine tuned to the new Volume Bars, which I lobbied for, for over 3 years and perfectly geometrical charting. The only "newness" is the ERG which replaced Stochastics 2 years ago.
If you would have ever bothered to learn what you "say" you have access to you would understand that. Ah, but it's easier to gossip. More fun too. Hey, you could always try to prove the method wrong . . . that would be fun wouldn't it. Of course then if you couldn't you would have to admit to it.
I don't know why you feel it necessary to resort to verbal abuse and sarcasm. I stated what I felt was a valid criticism. I am not Duey from Utah, whoever he is. And I do have access to your website, and have spent many hours studying your materials. I came on board when your newsletters were still focusing on the 777 tick charts with the short and long ERG's etc. I don't recall offhand, but I'd guess I've been reading your stuff for about 3/4 year.
This is what I feel, and yes I would hesitate to say this to you personally, without the veil of an alias. Does this say something to you -- that I would hesitate? Maybe if you look at how you handle criticism (by getting abusive and condescending) with some honesty, you will understand why I would not say this to your face.
If you read what I wrote, you would see that although I did indeed have some negativity about your "system," I do in fact feel that I gained a lot from studying it. In fact, it helped me to "trade with the trend" like I never had before. I stopped fighting, and learned to flow. I am grateful for this.
What I find regretful -- and you're welcome to respond to this -- is that I find you have a need to throw around the impression of perfection, when it is not there. Bill, it's okay that the system isn't perfect. The markets aren't perfect, and no attempt to encapsulate them could come even close to perfection. I have discussed this issue with other students who feel likewise. The "Program" trades you post on your website (
http://www.logicalmarkettrends.com/2005 Program.htm) can, IMHO, not be duplicated following your system. You say that they are taken based on a "completely mechanical" system, in which case anyone trading the system should get identical, or extremely similar, results. If someone had the talent (I don't but the system is relatively simple and it shouldn't be that hard) to program your system into Tradestation, one should be able to reproduce the results found -- if the system is completely mechanical.
You are fond of issuing challenges, so here's a challenge: You have, I guess, more than 100 students. Some of them must surely have tried to program the Logicmaster system (on the 777 tick chart or the 343 volume chart or the 98 tick chart or whatever chart) and back/forward test. You claim that, to date in 2005, the system has produced a total of 1,765 points ($88,250!) per contract, while only losing 3 points! Perhaps "beginner" students have a hard time "seeing" all the setups, but a computer, with its computational power, should have no problem doing so. So can you reproduce a computerized "mechanical" system that can make 1,765 points per contract this year while only losing 3?
If yes, wow! If no, why not? A completely mechanical system such as Logicmaster is easily given to hard set rules.
I don't deny that you make money as a trader -- you may or may not. Unless you show someone statements, I guess we'll never know. I take issue with you saying that 1) Your system, as you post its results on the website, is completely mechanical, and can be duplicated. 2) That you have not changed the rules -- you have, and not just from ticks to vol. When I came on board, you traded exclusively off the 777-tick chart. When students sometimes questioned how you got in or out of trades earlier than they did, you said that you were using the 98-tick chart for precision; but only sometimes. I never quite understood how one knew when to enter the trade based on an early signal from the 98-tick chart, and when one waited for the signal off the 777-tick chart. This is an example of the "subjectivity" of which I spoke. It used to be that trades were only taken in the direction of the slow ERG on the 777; now the slow ERG isn't even mentioned. 3) I wish that you responded to the content of the criticisms, instead of just getting angry and dismissive. 4) You say you have nothing to sell, yet it seems to me that since "only attendees of the seminars will be given subscriptions to the website," that in fact you are selling something; not a website subscription, but a seminar fee in order to see the "subscriber only" section of the website. Please, correct me if I'm wrong.
I'm very open to stand corrected on any or all of these issues. Please don't call me a liar, as I've tried to be as honest as possible. If you feel I've been misleading, show me how, and I will take it back. If other students of Bill feel I'm wrong, tell me why; I will not stand on ceremony. I have gained much from your website, and I feel the $300 I spent was a great investment. But that doesn't prevent me from calling a spade a spade.