Spydertrader's Jack Hershey Futures Trading Journal
- Thread starter Spydertrader
- Start date
- Status
If this is true for learning SCT no problem. If it is true for just learning and becoming profitable with the basics (ES/Volume/PRV and YM) than the future is pretty bleak. Unfortunately I just don't have two more years at my disposal to try to understand this method.
Hopefully it is not this way
Quote from guavaman:
Hopefully it is not this way
How long the process takes for each individual varies. No set timetable exists. Some grasp the concepts rather quickly; while others take much longer. No need to compare yourself to anyone. Simply follow the path which bests suits your own needs. Find the areas which do make sense, and focus on those areas for now. The rest comes into clarity over time and the use of repetition.
- Spydertrader
Spydertrader, your words are always encouraging. You're far ahead on this journey, you're generously sharing your knowledge and experience, and probably genuinely believe that because you did it anybody can do it. You emphasize that by doing the work (repetition) everybody can reach the goal.
I'd like to venture a little different opinion. I think that one reason for which so many started this journey over the years, worked enthusiastically, and hard, but never reached proficiency with this methods, is because they concentrated too much on mechanically implementing a set of rules as they understood them. Just doing the work (repetition) is not enough. You have to make the effort to understand the why, not only the how. When you start understanding the why, and re-read Jack's old posts (and yours), most of the time you understand new nuances, you learn new things.
From my experience, I'd advise everybody to make the effort to understand the logic behind each element of this method. When I read something that doesn't make sense, my reaction is not to say that this doesn't work or that I need somebody to explain it to me more clearly. I keep thinking about it from different angles, over time, until usually I get it. Sometimes the harder this process is, and the longer it takes, the more enlightening the breakthrough is.
Most people's first reaction, when they see that somebody has a different opinion than theirs, is that the other side is in error, and stop there. This is a very counterproductive frame of mind.
Another counterproductive attitude is when the pupil blames the teacher for his lack of progress. Sometimes the teacher is not competent enough, sometimes the teacher's method is not suited for that pupil, and this is an additional hurdle for the pupil. But in the end, if a pupil wants to learn, he has to find the way to make the journey with what he's given. This is also the spirit that allows some pupils to go beyond their teachers' expertise.
I'd like to venture a little different opinion. I think that one reason for which so many started this journey over the years, worked enthusiastically, and hard, but never reached proficiency with this methods, is because they concentrated too much on mechanically implementing a set of rules as they understood them. Just doing the work (repetition) is not enough. You have to make the effort to understand the why, not only the how. When you start understanding the why, and re-read Jack's old posts (and yours), most of the time you understand new nuances, you learn new things.
From my experience, I'd advise everybody to make the effort to understand the logic behind each element of this method. When I read something that doesn't make sense, my reaction is not to say that this doesn't work or that I need somebody to explain it to me more clearly. I keep thinking about it from different angles, over time, until usually I get it. Sometimes the harder this process is, and the longer it takes, the more enlightening the breakthrough is.
Most people's first reaction, when they see that somebody has a different opinion than theirs, is that the other side is in error, and stop there. This is a very counterproductive frame of mind.
Another counterproductive attitude is when the pupil blames the teacher for his lack of progress. Sometimes the teacher is not competent enough, sometimes the teacher's method is not suited for that pupil, and this is an additional hurdle for the pupil. But in the end, if a pupil wants to learn, he has to find the way to make the journey with what he's given. This is also the spirit that allows some pupils to go beyond their teachers' expertise.
1) Does increasing volume on inside of lateral (bar to bar at close of bar) mean anything other than buyers and sellers in a battle which resulted in a draw? Can anything resembling change be gleaned from such a bar? My best guess is that this is continuation.
2)If lateral formation breaks out on increasing volume (over prior bar) in a direction which is non-dominant, does that mean somewhere in the lateral was the FTT of the forest? In other words, at a fairly coarse level, this inc prv b/o from the lateral represents a change signal if one missed the FTT?
Concrete example:
Letâs say Iâm trading âftt to fttâ forest level. Iâm currently long in an up channel forest.
Iâm looking for ftt (already had a flaw and/or a VE) and what I now observe and annotate is a lateral formation. If price b/oâs from the lateral formation on increasing volume over prior bar to the DOWN SIDE, is this a signal for change? Ie if I were looking for an FTT, missed it somehow (or maybe occurred within the lateral) and saw this just described b/o, is this the place to reverse? Or enter is I hadnât been long and looking for a forest level entry?
3) It seems like during a lateral, the usual decreasing volume, should not play a part in what the dominant Gaussian looks like. IOW- when drawing in a dominant Gaussian which is a forest level traverse, the decreasing lateral volume is ignored when a lateral formation exists as part of the dominant traverse. Do I have this correct?
2)If lateral formation breaks out on increasing volume (over prior bar) in a direction which is non-dominant, does that mean somewhere in the lateral was the FTT of the forest? In other words, at a fairly coarse level, this inc prv b/o from the lateral represents a change signal if one missed the FTT?
Concrete example:
Letâs say Iâm trading âftt to fttâ forest level. Iâm currently long in an up channel forest.
Iâm looking for ftt (already had a flaw and/or a VE) and what I now observe and annotate is a lateral formation. If price b/oâs from the lateral formation on increasing volume over prior bar to the DOWN SIDE, is this a signal for change? Ie if I were looking for an FTT, missed it somehow (or maybe occurred within the lateral) and saw this just described b/o, is this the place to reverse? Or enter is I hadnât been long and looking for a forest level entry?
3) It seems like during a lateral, the usual decreasing volume, should not play a part in what the dominant Gaussian looks like. IOW- when drawing in a dominant Gaussian which is a forest level traverse, the decreasing lateral volume is ignored when a lateral formation exists as part of the dominant traverse. Do I have this correct?
Repetition has its place in the total learning process.
Can a child excel in mathematics if he cannot recite the 10x10 multiplication table? I doubt it.
Understanding how multiplication works is not enough. You have to know the numbers by heart, otherwise you will not be able to react to questions (challenges) posed to you.
How did you learn your multiplication table? I learned it by repetition.
Learning this trading method is no different: You have to know your channels, FTTs, flaws, gaussians, etc., by heart. Without the mechanical dexterity, you might not be able to recognize an opportunity fast enough to make timely decision and action.
p.s. Of course if one learned the multiplication table through repetition, but do not apply it to problem solving, all the effort is still in vain.
edited 2:54pm
Can a child excel in mathematics if he cannot recite the 10x10 multiplication table? I doubt it.
Understanding how multiplication works is not enough. You have to know the numbers by heart, otherwise you will not be able to react to questions (challenges) posed to you.
How did you learn your multiplication table? I learned it by repetition.
Learning this trading method is no different: You have to know your channels, FTTs, flaws, gaussians, etc., by heart. Without the mechanical dexterity, you might not be able to recognize an opportunity fast enough to make timely decision and action.
p.s. Of course if one learned the multiplication table through repetition, but do not apply it to problem solving, all the effort is still in vain.
edited 2:54pm
- Status