Question for Grob/Hershey...
- Thread starter makosgu
- Start date
- Status
I keep an eye on the absolute value of str/squ (or premium) as well as the change in premium from one 2 min period to the next. I color code that delta and a few times a day it will get really extreme and the color will catch my eye. It's another flag to consider.
It's also useful to ignore it until it's relevant... so master the coarse aspects first so you know that.
This stuff is like boxing -- if you start watching his right hand he'll hit you with the left out of nowhere. Get some gloves and box with your buddies in the living room - you learn to anticipate and not focus on one thing or the other unless it's important.
I'm not implying you don't know these things already - just an illustration.
I'm still working on incorporating str/squ usefully into my trading. I'd say I'm an advanced beginner -- so thank god I get to be sloppy. I don't need much beyond coarse to get the job done.
.......errr and I understand what jobs I'm qualified for. I also understand what jobs are available and the credentials required. Some pay better than others.
Speaking of asymptotes - this thread is going asymptotic to the garbage can. Happens every time. It's an alternative that cannot be eliminated in this context.
Amazing.
In the words of Yogi Berra, "It's Deja Vu all over again."
Supporters and Detractors of Jack Hershey have continued their debate on the validity of Jack Hershey's claims since the early days of USENET. Some credit Jack for providing them a great insight into market dynamics, and as a result, an increasing bank account. Others tout the failure of Jack to post trades in real time as proof of charlatan activity. Both proponents and critics claim the moral high ground, and their debate has cycled more times than Jack's famed Equities Method. What is more; the discussion appears to have no end in sight.
The detractors point to the necessity of needing 'proof' before they exercise any effort to decode that which they have deemed undiscernible, convoluted and confusing. The proponents of the Hershey Methodologies point to the successes some have had following Jack's methods. The critics point to the failures experienced by some. Both sides truly believe they have the best interests of others at heart.
Clearly, some have used all or part of Jack's teachings to improve their trading. Numerous posts of this kind exist. Many have even offered to share some of their experiences in an effort to help others see the light.
Jack doesn't owe anybody a single thing. He has provided his knowledge free of charge to anyone with an interest. The decision to follow Jack's advice or ignore his many posts remains one of personal choice. However, if you think creating challenges for Jack motivates him, you have seriously underestimated his intellect.
For nearly a year, I have explained how I trade Jack's Equities Method in the Journal which bears his name. I have provided a highly detailed methodology for developing a Daily Watch List of stocks, how to determine both entrys and exists for those equities, as well as, posted both winning and losing trades in a frequently updated Results file. Yet some have claimed I too need to prove myself to them - demanding I provide proof that I actually trade the methods I have shared. I have posted many times regarding my thoughts with respect to convincing others about my trade results. In short, it isn't my job to convince others, and it isn't Jack's job to convince anyone either. He simply provides the information. What anyone believes with respect to the validity of Jack's (or mine or anyone else's) methods matters little and affects Jack's (or my, or anyone else's) profits none. You can spend all the time and energy you like attempting to motivate Jack to accept your challenge. It always ends the same way because we've all been down this road so many times before.
Good trading everyone.
- Spydertrader
In the words of Yogi Berra, "It's Deja Vu all over again."
Supporters and Detractors of Jack Hershey have continued their debate on the validity of Jack Hershey's claims since the early days of USENET. Some credit Jack for providing them a great insight into market dynamics, and as a result, an increasing bank account. Others tout the failure of Jack to post trades in real time as proof of charlatan activity. Both proponents and critics claim the moral high ground, and their debate has cycled more times than Jack's famed Equities Method. What is more; the discussion appears to have no end in sight.
The detractors point to the necessity of needing 'proof' before they exercise any effort to decode that which they have deemed undiscernible, convoluted and confusing. The proponents of the Hershey Methodologies point to the successes some have had following Jack's methods. The critics point to the failures experienced by some. Both sides truly believe they have the best interests of others at heart.
Clearly, some have used all or part of Jack's teachings to improve their trading. Numerous posts of this kind exist. Many have even offered to share some of their experiences in an effort to help others see the light.
Jack doesn't owe anybody a single thing. He has provided his knowledge free of charge to anyone with an interest. The decision to follow Jack's advice or ignore his many posts remains one of personal choice. However, if you think creating challenges for Jack motivates him, you have seriously underestimated his intellect.
For nearly a year, I have explained how I trade Jack's Equities Method in the Journal which bears his name. I have provided a highly detailed methodology for developing a Daily Watch List of stocks, how to determine both entrys and exists for those equities, as well as, posted both winning and losing trades in a frequently updated Results file. Yet some have claimed I too need to prove myself to them - demanding I provide proof that I actually trade the methods I have shared. I have posted many times regarding my thoughts with respect to convincing others about my trade results. In short, it isn't my job to convince others, and it isn't Jack's job to convince anyone either. He simply provides the information. What anyone believes with respect to the validity of Jack's (or mine or anyone else's) methods matters little and affects Jack's (or my, or anyone else's) profits none. You can spend all the time and energy you like attempting to motivate Jack to accept your challenge. It always ends the same way because we've all been down this road so many times before.
Good trading everyone.
- Spydertrader
Just to add some Squ/Str stuff, I write down the values vertically so I get the High, Low, and Neutral values.(from Nwbprops thread). Jack has said that neutral is the most important value, and I believe that is where the flapper comes from. The Squ/str will lead sometimes with extreme values, but most of what I see is that it will oscillate from neutral to an upper/lower value. I associate that behavior with say a 5min tape fast to med pace, with the upper/lower value equaling the right to left traverse, and neutral equaling the left to right. I know a tape fills the channel, I'm just trying to be descriptive. So the point being you can watch the Squ/Str go thru neutral at the left line or FTT's. Of course this is medium level monitoring, and I agree that most of the work can be done on course. I am a hyper sweeper and have to remind myself to knock it off.
I appreciate you guys trying to continue this thread, I only get to trade every third week am's, so I usually lie low as my progress thru this stuff is a tad slower.
As to the other guys, Spyderman said it well, it matters little if you believe this or not. We all look at the same words, we all look at the same chart, some make money, some do not. Someone once said, "I don't know if I can continue with this", my first thought was I don't think I will ever stop. Jack is the Shit, later.
I appreciate you guys trying to continue this thread, I only get to trade every third week am's, so I usually lie low as my progress thru this stuff is a tad slower.
As to the other guys, Spyderman said it well, it matters little if you believe this or not. We all look at the same words, we all look at the same chart, some make money, some do not. Someone once said, "I don't know if I can continue with this", my first thought was I don't think I will ever stop. Jack is the Shit, later.
lolBE CONGRUENT with what you say. You are detracting from the ones who are trying to learn in this thread. The Learners are NOT the ones asking for prints.
I hope you live up to your word and let the learners learn.
Good luck tomorrow to all fellow traders. Lets all make some money.
Thx ALL, the team (A) et al...
I apologize for leaving early today, I had to tend to an isolated domestic situation. Otherwise, it would have been the usual day of charts and posts.
BA/Moz, I agree it is as you say. I am kind of a nutso about sequences which is why I had asked my original Q. It will just be a matter of screen time and learning to know when to look at the str/squ stuff and all things considered, it is at the end of traverses (ie. channel boundaries).
For the rest we just have to keep focused. Detractors are straight ignorable. Avoiding commenting detractions is like burying garbage. Otherwise, detractions comments begat detraction comments in a never ending loop (ie. more sequences). I threw them a ~2x bone as we see, no effort was taken to decipher. It is the prime reason why they do as they do (ie. no effort).
As usual, Kind Regards & Move Forward,
MAK!
I apologize for leaving early today, I had to tend to an isolated domestic situation. Otherwise, it would have been the usual day of charts and posts.
BA/Moz, I agree it is as you say. I am kind of a nutso about sequences which is why I had asked my original Q. It will just be a matter of screen time and learning to know when to look at the str/squ stuff and all things considered, it is at the end of traverses (ie. channel boundaries).
For the rest we just have to keep focused. Detractors are straight ignorable. Avoiding commenting detractions is like burying garbage. Otherwise, detractions comments begat detraction comments in a never ending loop (ie. more sequences). I threw them a ~2x bone as we see, no effort was taken to decipher. It is the prime reason why they do as they do (ie. no effort).
As usual, Kind Regards & Move Forward,
MAK!
- Status