Quote from NihabaAshi:
...My point, how can someone state as if it is FACT that something doesn't work if they don't want to spend the time and energy to learn it, test it and report actual facts about the methodology???
Just to be clear, I don't think I ever said that Jack's methods don't "work." If anything, I may have commented that they appear unnecessarily complicated. However, that is just a personal bias. What I have an issue with is that Jack claims to make 3 times the daily range
with regularity, and that he can
average 4-7% per day.
Mark, if you have traded for any length of time, and it appears that you have, then you will have to agree that such claims are beyond anything that has ever been achieved in the financial arena, ever! EVER! It is such claims of profitability, which I believe are not achievable with regularity, and his pompous attitude towards others who dare to question anything he says, that grates on my nerves. Why would I spend my time learning a trading method when I already have and use one? I am not the one making the claim. I am the one questioning the claim.
The onus of proof is customarily on the one making the claim, particularly when it is patently absurd. If someone claims, but refuses to prove, that he has a machine that turns copper into gold, is the onus on me to prove it is not so?
The man is full of shit. This is not an insult. It is the considered observation of anyone who lives in the real world and has read any of his posts and his claims. I invite you to do so. Of course, he is entitled to be full of shit. It is his right. However, I am entitled to call him on it. It is my right.
If Jack does not want to be called on his claims, then he should not make them. If he does not want to prove his claims, then he should not make them. If you disagree with this premise, then you are being unreasonable.
