Where is that ... ahem... "doctorial" - LOL - (sic) thesis for a start? You know, comments like that to make you appear credible in front of fleecable noobs.Quote from ProfLogic:
Prove the fraud by some other means other than your normal sophomoric rantings . . . "because I said so".
Quote from Joe Doaks:
..................snip snip..............
How to spot a phony. What mistakes not to make. But no one here who is truly successful will tell you ANYTHING specific about a profitable method. And beware anyone here who claims they will. They're guaranteed to be frauds. Or worse.

Just take a look at the noobs on your thread losing their ass left and right ... of course, they'll be too afraid to post their losses now with you screaming at them and telling them they're stupid.Quote from ProfLogic:
Prove the fraud by some other means other than your normal sophomoric rantings . . . "because I said so".
Wrong again.Quote from ProfLogic:
When Mandelbrot INITIATED his unsubstantiated attack I simply defended myself. I know in your twisted environment that is a bad thing but you are the exception . . . not the rule.
Those references to Mandle aren't racist either. If you knew me you would know that statement is hilarious and ignorant. He is what he is and each time he opens his mouth he proves it.
Someday you will grow up and become a productive addition to society . . . . well . . . then again . . .
))))Quote from MandelbrotSet:
Just take a look at the noobs on your thread losing their ass left and right ... of course, they'll be too afraid to post their losses now with you screaming at them and telling them they're stupid.
LOL ... hate to say it, but I toldja so! :0)
I say it's time for some more "perfect trade" hindsight charts.
Quote from MandelbrotSet:
Wrong again.
I questioned your rules after I caught you in lie-after-lie. Hell just look at how you keep re-writing your "master list" of rules, creating exceptions and adding in chart after chart showing the higher timeframe in an attempt to show the method to be profitable in more than a random fashion! :0)
Not too logical now is it?
BTW, thanks again for proving your method doesn't work worth a damn, we knew it all along ...))))