Spydertrader's Jack Hershey Futures Trading Journal

[bundlemaker]

Quote from bi9foot:

Bundle,

Don't take this the wrong way. Several folks (especially Avi 8) have offered to help you out, however this kind of attitude is not going to get you any where.

Several people have asked you to post the daily chart and you haven't, I have wondered why you haven't done so but instead had posted several other messages afterwards. Folks like to see the chart to see what your chart looks like so that they can better understand your thinking.

For example I looked at your first chart and noticed your gaussians were wrong and said to myself why the heck is he trading against the dominant direction? You had a R2R (while I had a dec Red to inc. Black) in you chart so it kind of makes sense because you thought you had down as the dominant direction.

If you want to work with someone, I would advise you to follow their instructions and see if it helps, if not you can politely say thanks and try something else. Mike has given you his phone number (heck he hasn't given me his number) and has indicated his willingness to help. It is up to you to decide if you want to take it up (which also means listening to him) or decline it.

I realize you are frustrated, but all you have done is ignored pretty much all of advice given to you during the past two weeks.

Just as Mike has offered, I have also told you to let me know if you need help but you have not taken that offer either.

Am I losing my mind. Avi asked me to post my chart and I immediatley did. It's back just a couple pages. I have not regularly posted my chart because often I can't do the whole day and didn't want to clog up the thread. Additionally, Mike posted a bunch of quotes from other posts that really didn't repsond to what I've been asking.

At this point, perhaps I am a bit frustrated. But, really, it's more about communication than trading. I've repeatedly asked for discussion on my specific questions. And what I get is everything but that. I've gone back (three times) to review the last 50 pages, and I honestly, truly feel like the core of what I continue to post on just goes wooshing by. If you think it appropriate I can make a big post with all the questions, but frankly in the past when I have done that, most of it gets ignored too.

No where have I asked for hand holding. I'm only trying to get a real conversation going about specific chart situations and specific mindsets. Today I posted on 4 dicison points in real time, and best as I can recall, no one posted a single thing on them except you. THen I posed some thoughts on gaussians and where I sttrongly suspect I'm screwing up, and then no further talk on that. Instead, just a repeat of the same stuff about "your not supposed to be trading", after I've posted a million times (exagerated for purpose) that I'm not trading.

 

[ang_99]

Anybody else get confused on the non dom traverse starting @ 13:40 ending 14:10?

Red volume was was kind of steady and was not decreasing as we would expect on a non dom traverse back to the RTL.

That threw me off a bit.

 

[bundlemaker]

Quote from Steve Tvardek:

Wish I could help you but from what you've described here and seeing your chart snippet from today, we just go about things very differently, I wouldnt know where to begin. Hopefully someone else approaches things similar to you so they can better get inside your head.

Steve, my deepest apologies for forgeting to mention you on last post.

This post hits the nail on the head. You approach things totally differently. I strongly suspect you see most of this pretty differently too. That's where the problem lies, you understood what Spyder has layed out in a way that works. I understood Spyder in a way that doesn't work.

Other than demonstration or talking about a myriad chart scenarios (or getting lucky enough to figure it out myself) those struggling won't progress. All day long I tried to stimulate conversation on such scenarios, but instead, most of what was posted was simply not relevant.

 

[dkm]

Quote from bundlemaker:

..... most of what was posted was simply not relevant.

Bob, before we all lose the plot here, can you please state what it is you wish to clarify? One question at a time. It will help us all to work through this logically.

 

[Steve Tvardek]

What really hit home for me was knowing that the foundation of method was very solid however Spyder said time and again that the goal is not to do it exactly like him rather to get to the same place in the end. I tried hard to mimic his charts for awhile and to see things exactly as he sees them but I found when I approached things from my point of view AND using the same core foundation that the method is built on (channels, gaussians, and the rest), thats when things clicked for me.

Quote from bundlemaker:

Steve, my deepest apologies for forgeting to mention you on last post.

This post hits the nail on the head. You approach things totally differently. I strongly suspect you see most of this pretty differently too. That's where the problem lies, you understood what Spyder has layed out in a way that works. I understood Spyder in a way that doesn't work.

Other than demonstration or talking about a myriad chart scenarios (or getting lucky enough to figure it out myself) those struggling won't progress. All day long I tried to stimulate conversation on such scenarios, but instead, most of what was posted was simply not relevant.

 

[bi9foot]

Quote from bundlemaker:

Am I losing my mind. Avi asked me to post my chart and I immediatley did.

Disconnect in the meaning of immediately perhaps.

4:02pm Avi tells you to post your chart

4:09pm, 4:11pm, 4:17pm - You post three messages

4:14pm Avi tells you to post your chart anyways

4:33pm you make another post

4:47 - you finally post your chart.

45 minutes later. That is not immediately.

Just laying out what I saw while waiting for you to post the chart.

EDIT: Bob, above was not meant as a attack at you. Leave open the possibility in your mind that what you understand as being said could be different from what was intended or what others take it to mean.

 

[Jason Rosen]

Quote from bundlemaker:

MY apologies, I admit I can be a boob at times. That chart snippet has an incorrect note. It should read:

"Which Way to Draw the Green Line"

iow's, how to know how to draw the gaussian

bundlemaker,

FWIW, your video on channels made the potential of this methodology very clear to me and I'm greatful for your hard work putting that together. I've only been at this for a little over a week but I'd like to offer some friendly advice if I may. Take a step back. Go back to the forest level and regain your confidence. You know what to do and you can be successful at this but it may just take looking only at the big picture again to get back on the right track.

When you get frustrated, as I did a few times today, you tend to lose focus and begin to concentrate on bar to bar moves. Anticipating those incorrectly only makes it worse and you begin to feel completely lost.

Looking at the big picture and making a few (2-4 paper trades) during the day can net you a good return at the forest level. Try it for a few days but remain disciplined. It will pay off. YOU CAN BE SUCCESSFUL AT THIS! You've proven it already. Take a deep breath focus on the core components.

 

[Steve Tvardek]

Let me also make this perfectly clear, I learned everything I needed from Spydertrader to get to the point where I could go about it on my own; to personalize the way I go about my business, the way I see and take advantage of opportunities.

Perhaps you are too focused on seeing things through Spyders eyes to the detriment of seeing things through your own?

 

[nkhoi]

Quote from bundlemaker:

...

12:20 Long @ 1447.50, inc PRV forming a pt3, out at 1446 on RTL break. Loss: 1.5 pt's

13:00 Short @ 1446. PRV was clearly increasing on downward price movement, the prior up channel was broken and a R2R was clear on ES and YM. Out at rtl break @ 1447.75. Loss 1.75pt.s.

These are the kind of trades I take. THey fit with what we've been taught almost to perfection. SOmehow I seem to stumble on these nice little losses exclusively

until the 'official' guidance, here is my take.
12:20 long (first arrow) as I also saw b2b, decr red then incr blk.

13:00 short? this was at limb level down channel, point 2 of this limb channel was also the point 3 for the new up forest level channel. If I stayed focus at limb level I might shorted but since I already had point 3 of the new forest channel I was unlikely to short at 13:00, I would had long at 13:00 or 13:05 (second or third arrow) after seeing point 3 of the forest channel and seeing that the 13:00 red bar was unable to pass point 3.

 

[bundlemaker]

Quote from dkm:

Bob, before we all lose the plot here, can you please state what it is you wish to clarify? One question at a time. It will help us all to work through this logically.

David, thank you for your post.

Frankly, at this point it's moot. I posted during the day in the hopes that, while things were fresh in my mind, some discussion on perspective and mind-set on specific situations could follow.

I feel like I'm in the Twilight Zone, as I've posted so many questions, one at a time, over the past few weeks that I don't even remember them all. I don't recall any of them being responded to in a substantive manner.

Today, I posted on annotating pt3's and on learning how to correctly draw gaussians before they are completed. The two subjects seem connected in some way. Actually, they must be. But, as I posted earlier today, you can't tell, bar by bar (before the gaussian completes) whether the gaussian is decreasing or increasing volume. Ivob replied, but had nothing to do with my question (and I apogize, that may be due to a typo on the chart snippet). I then replied to Ivo to that effect. So far, all day, no reply. A bunch of other stuff that has nothing to do with this, but no solid reply, not a single word, on gaussians forming, intra-gaussian volume spikes, when to draw, when to correct, how to not get fooled by spike that look for all the world like *2* but aren't, none of this. But plenty on telling me I'm not supposed to be trading, when in fact I never was.