Speechless Jack Hershey
Fdate Trader
Each part, written in advance of events that have unfolded. This series is
still available to those who did not get an opportunity to view them at
http://fdates.com/discus. They can be found under the topic heading LATEST
MARKET WATCH REPORTS.
This 3-part lesson was created specifically for our members only, as are all
the Market Watch reports. However, I thought it a good idea to let the
public see some of what we do in our membership in the way of ongoing
lessons on trading.
The reports use some terminology that is not commonly known to non-members.
However, if you read all 3 reports it will fill in most if not all of the
blanks.
I will keep these reports available for a limited time only.
Since releasing these reports, in the midst of Jack Hershey's relentless
postings where he suggests my approach is faulty and in error, he has no
real reply to these lessons. They clearly demonstrate our logical approach
to isolating excellent trading opportunities. The real beauty to this right
now is that Copper continues to move deeper into profit territory from our
sell setup. As the 3-part lesson outlines, we were able to anticipate a
weekly top EARLY and enter EARLY while many others wait for more
confirmation and end up getting in late with greater risk.
No need to say more on this. You can read these yourselves.
--
Rick J. Ratchford
Precision Trading Membership
http://fdates.com
==============================
CURRENT TRADING BOOK DEALS - http://fdates.com/book_offer.htm
John Smith
"Fdate Trader" <pro...@fd.at.es.com> wrote in message
news:V6KA8.2231$_41....@nwrddc04.gnilink.net...
Jack Hershey
post in a responsive manner to threads others initiate to buttress and
reinforce their theme from a TA perspective. I am for things and not
against things as a rule. I found I could not comment directly in the
copper discussion. Mostly because your postings did not have any provision
for response on the remote site. I now understand that I should post here.
The Alternative, for example, is a replacement for something of lesser
merit. I am for top notch stuff.
One of my rules of trading is to not trade when trading is not possible.
Currently you are posting in your members group and allowing your posts to
be seen there along with other members dialog with you on the subject. (I
assume they make comments when they want and they haven't as yet done any.)
Your entry on copper and the associated contemporary potential stops you
will exit on is something you can solo on for the benefit of all. We do not
have access to the glossary and jargon explanations at this point nor can we
participate in any way.
Since a TA major topic was introduced on 5/1 in MIF , I commented there at
noon on 5/3. I wove several comments related to The Alternative and a
general class of approaches which generically are called by Bain "unusable".
I renamed them "yoyo".
Use my comments there as a replacement for your copper stuff. There is
nothing proprietary in my post so it may be used without subscribing to any
service. Because you have made the comments you have, I will take the
trouble to deal with the situation right here.
Go to Bain's thread "Short 'n Sweet" of 5/1/2002 11:20 pm on my MIF listing.
It was posted right after your "sewer trash" apology to Mike Higgs. You
suggested you hit the wrong key and put the post in the wrong place. As a
"sewer trashee" myself , I can understand how mike felt as well even though
you have not, now, included him as a trashee at this point. I mentally
corrected your misplacement and now reason that it applies to those who post
in MIF that you don't value highly.
"Fdate Trader" <pro...@fd.at.es.com> wrote in message
news:V6KA8.2231$_41....@nwrddc04.gnilink.net...
Fdate Trader
"Jack Hershey" <jhers...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:ezXA8.26342$9c5.8...@news2.west.cox.net...
> I spoke about 10 hours before you initiated this thread. As an amateur, I
> post in a responsive manner to threads others initiate to buttress and
> reinforce their theme from a TA perspective.
Thanks for reminding us of your trading status. Easy with the 'butt' words,
okay?
> I am for things and not against things as a rule.
How profound. I've got to write this down.
> I found I could not comment directly in the copper discussion. Mostly
because your postings did not have any provision
> for response on the remote site. I now understand that I should post
here.
Such a quick learner.
> The Alternative, for example, is a replacement for something of lesser
> merit. I am for top notch stuff.
Many living an Alternative lifestyle would certainly agree with you on that.
> One of my rules of trading is to not trade when trading is not possible.
Wait. Let me write that down also.
> Currently you are posting in your members group and allowing your posts to
> be seen there along with other members dialog with you on the subject.
We call that communication.
> (I assume they make comments when they want and they haven't as yet done
any.)
Send a self-addressed stamped envelope and I'll send you a copy of their
comments, if you like.
> Your entry on copper and the associated contemporary potential stops you
> will exit on is something you can solo on for the benefit of all. We do
not
> have access to the glossary and jargon explanations at this point nor can
we
> participate in any way.
Sorry to use terms like 'price bar' and 'sell stop'. I'll try to break it
down a bit more next time.
> Since a TA major topic was introduced on 5/1 in MIF , I commented there at
> noon on 5/3. I wove several comments related to The Alternative and a
> general class of approaches which generically are called by Bain
"unusable".
What page is that on? I'm looking at Bain's book right now and one-third way
through it we are finally getting to the part where he explains how to dial
a telephone to call your broker. Am I close?
> I renamed them "yoyo".
Carryover from what your High School classmates used to call you, or the
name of a hamster you once had?
> Use my comments there as a replacement for your copper stuff. There is
> nothing proprietary in my post so it may be used without subscribing to
any
> service.
Nothing proprietary at all? Don't cut yourself short Jack. I'm sure if you
tried a little harder you might come up with something worth paying for.
> Because you have made the comments you have, I will take the
> trouble to deal with the situation right here.
I certainly can appreciate the amount of trouble this must impose on you, to
post 11 messages this week rather than your regular 10. My apologies.
> Go to Bain's thread "Short 'n Sweet" of 5/1/2002 11:20 pm on my MIF
listing.
> It was posted right after your "sewer trash" apology to Mike Higgs. You
> suggested you hit the wrong key and put the post in the wrong place.
You know how it is Jack. The Jack key was so close to the Mike key and my
fingers can be all thumbs sometimes.
> As a "sewer trashee" myself , I can understand how mike felt as well even
though
> you have not, now, included him as a trashee at this point.
Well I didn't include you myself, but that doesn't mean you can't volunteer
on your own as you just did. You've taken 'Know Thyself' to heart and I
admire that.
> I mentally corrected your misplacement and now reason that it applies to
those who post
> in MIF that you don't value highly.
How much value do you put on trash? When your mind takes a break from
'mentally correcting', let us know.
Jack Hershey
comments here as he has indicated. They are going to be entitled:
Basic information on the algorithm and copper posts.
Making money.
The larger picture.
ynotssor
Please don't change the Subject: lines within a thread, Jack, and include
the pertinent quoted portions of what you are replying to.
It makes it very difficult to follow the logic otherwise.
Thanks.
tony
Ken Johnson
Jack - why bother? Everyone knows you are a bumbling old fool who has lost
his mind. Take a break and tell your nurse you want to go nite-nite.
craig wisper
> > will exit on is something you can solo on for the benefit of all. We do
> not
> > have access to the glossary and jargon explanations at this point nor
can
> we
> > participate in any way.
>
> Sorry to use terms like 'price bar' and 'sell stop'. I'll try to break it
> down a bit more next time.
>
Fdate, did you not say;
The reports use some terminology that is not commonly known to non-members.
However, if you read all 3 reports it will fill in most if not all of the
blanks.
?????????
Ricky what was is the risk to reward ratio for this copper trade?
1:1
Are you in or out of it?
craig wisper
"Ken Johnson" <kjohn...@kscable.com> wrote in message
news:GVeB8.8198$Fr2.2...@twister.kc.rr.com...
>
> "Jack Hershey" <jhers...@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:qpeB8.30185$9c5.1...@news2.west.cox.net...
> > I'll do three brief segments here under this heading. Rick would like
my
> > comments here as he has indicated. They are going to be entitled:
> > Basic information on the algorithm and copper posts.
> > Making money.
> > The larger picture.
>
> Jack - why bother?
Because Ken, you might accidentally learn something.
Everyone knows you are a bumbling old fool who has lost
> his mind. Take a break and tell your nurse you want to go nite-nite.
Everyone but me.
Jack Hershey
numeral for part, -number for page and -number for paragraph as printed out
using the original extension.
The copper posts cover four days:
day 1-Friday 26th-- post of 28th called part I
day 2 monday 29th --post after close on 29th called part II
day 3 tuesday 30th
day 4 wednseday 1st-- post after close on the 2nd.
There are seven letters used to form acronyms:
B -- bottom
C --confirmed.
D -- daily
L -- Last
S-- swing
T --top
W -- Week.
There is a report that contains stuff Rick uses:
F date report -- It contains stuff that is currently in effect.
The term "within" is used.
A day in time is "within" either Fdates and/or Wdates.
Fdates including end points include 3 days. Before during and after the date
stated. Thus and date of the market may be included in three Fdates.
Wdates including end points include 15 business days. They are all Friday
dates. Count back nine more daysfrom 4/26 to the 4/15.(a Monday) and count
ahead to 5/3 for five days (a Friday). See I-4-2 for the citation. If you
use consecutive Fridays as Wdates you can easily see that any given day is
"within" 3 Wdates just like any given day is within 3 Fdates.
Thus there is a huge blurr of dates at all times.
This brings up three terms:
Potential
Pre-confirmed
Confirmed.
The copper exposition takes place in a setting:
The LCWS is a WSB which set a status of a "confirmed" long trend. Most
other methods using TA or mecahnics agree here. The trend depicted is an
intermediate trem trend; and the depiction is "long". F dates cannot ever
"confirm" a contemporary trading trend on a given day that is any less than
an intermediate trend.
Part I and its exact repeat with respect to the last bar, Part II deal with
"pre-confirmed" stauses where thay address short term trends, not
intermediate term trends. The pre-confirmed trend as the two bars have
higher highs is called a "short"
"Potential" is a word used to descrbe whether the situation more inclided to
something. Think "probable" when you see "potential" used specifically with
respect to "long" or "short" assertions to characterize what is
"pre-confirmed" or "confirmed"
Finally, bar length. The bar length is the crucial stepping off point.
These hi/lo things occur within the O/C values. They are lagging values. A
value of "one tick" beyond the H/L values is part of orders and associated
strategy. Thus any entry, if made, is prtected by a stop that for that day
creates a "loss" two clicks longer than the volatility of the prior bar.
But unstated and unused in this method, as noted in the past there are three
other methods for replacing this situation.(Most of which are designed to
preserve the continuation of the trade by loosening stops.)
This scopes out the basics. Except for the daily 3 step process which
involves both Fdates and Wdates from the FDates Report combined and LCWS's
and "within's", "pre-confirms", "confirms" and "potentials".
Jack Hershey
dtrading day (day 2, 29th) after the post.
Part II did not yield an entry to make money (Applicable to day 3--30th).
Part II was an exact repeat of part I algoritm wise.
Day 4 If the algotithm were applied on this day an entry occurred Rick did
not comment in copper series on day 4 (5/1). No profit possible on this day
because of stop approach; only loss possible.
Part III covering up to after close of 5/1 but posted on 5/2 using daily
data covering 5/1 and no more. The algorithm set stop would allow profit
that day but would not allow any profit attaned during that day. the stops
are just set on a basis that lags by one day. Thus on any exit day you can
just imagine that the day did not occur in the marketplace.
The charts are not labelled in part III. Part III conclusion doesnot in
clude an exit.
On day 5 the first profits were locked in about two thirds of the shortest
bar (5/1) or 1/3 of the longest bar (5/2). If 5/3 goes "up" Rick takes
these profits. If it goes down (lower highs and lower lowers he locks in the
difference in the two most recent highs at the most.
Now you can begin to see why his money velocity is so abysmal.
He could not determine for two days that the "short" he desired to enter was
"long"
He stops so miserably that he automatically looses the last day of every
trend he plays.
He doe not monitor or operate on the fractal of the pace of the market.
He did his set up as a "pre-confirmed" trade that was the opposite of the
"confirmed" trade tah he could have immediately made money on.
Robert Blankenship
<<Jack - why bother? Everyone knows you are a bumbling old fool who
has lost his mind. Take a break and tell your nurse you want to go
nite-nite.>>
And everyone knows you are an asshole with a foul mouth, but that
doesn't seem to prevent YOU from posting your usual bullshit. It
really says a lot for Ratchford that you are his only supporter ... or
maybe you ARE Ratchford.
Jack Hershey
Doing a Fdate report. (Based on daily data after market close)
Doing a 3 step scan of 21 commodities daily. (After market close)
Doing "set ups" in a canned mechanical way. (Orders before open)
Not monitoring in real time.
Never changing from two fractals:
short term --Daily
intermediate term -- weekly
longest term -- extended weekly
Lets assume he does this and does it continually. He has days free and his
evenings are fairly well proscripted. Another way to put it is that he has
time to be employed somewhere daily or since, he is financially independant,
as he spells it, he can engage in other pursuits.
Occassionally his record number of posts per week is challenged by others
but not often.
The Fdates report must be a process of charting geometrically a few
commodities a day as the DST and DSB and WST and WSB all need to be
refreshed. The hogs one showed us a 6 day shift in the geometry and skipped
the inverted setup inbetween that he missed.
Gann
Squares
Support and resistance
Every date may apply to up to a combination of six "withins" per commodity
so this is an active pursuit or absolute over kill. In any event the signal
to noise ratio is priceless as it appears. The shortest route would be to
list "what isn't happening today". clutter clutter.
The three step is a carrosel thing that takes just moments per commodity and
I am sure he leafs the current Fdate report to do "within' and note the
currect LCWS and thus determine the "confirmed" and "pre-confirmed" right
then and there.
This gives a short list of "set ups" just as copper became one. He has not
told us explicitely how he ranks these for their "potential" but through
imference and implication we can easily derive that from the "risk" stuff.
(II-8-(n-2)).
Summary
I am sad to say that it looks like the copper has become for me an
outstanding example of how Rick has missed some real money making. He
would have posted this three part thing with much better sync if he had seen
it a day before and been in then and during the two days he watched it.
Three days of profits gone for a starter.
It is an absolute must at this point to junk the Fdates report. Every day
of trading is covered as a "within" of either or both Fdates and Wdates.
Secondly, the dates in the future turn out to not be used, actually, by the
3 step carrosel routine. It is self evident that there is always a LCWS.
and one can simply replace the WST, WSB, DST and DSB's all with simple trend
lines (which you actually do for you own sake when the chips are down.
The fractals rick uses are definitely pre PC era. Going to a longer weekly
for analysis nuances is going exactly the wrong way. Where Rick rarely uses
"anticipation" as a word in his textual stuff, he looks away from faster
fractals to slower ones Extended weekly where he shows "double weeklies"
compressed on the same geometry as weeklies lending more distortion by
eliminating time as a dimension laterally.
Rick cannot see consolidation with this approach at all, ever.
By trailing stops 1 going to 2 days there is no way real actual turns can be
reversed ever. this automatically sacrifices one of the trader's most
powerful tools.
Rick says he is a "position" trader, thus adopting a term used by
commercials. We now see why he does. It is not possible for this algorthm
to be applied to anything shorter than the intermediate term. Money
velocity occurs on the short term where the compound interest formula is
optimized. Money velocity is optimized in commodities over equities by the
leverage of margin trading in a market that is one commodity in character
rather than thousands of equities vying for scarce dollars.
Throughout this there is a current of the undisclosed for me. It is not
that I haven't "bought" his service. It is that Rick uses his proprietary
"shield' to protect himself. "Proprietary" is used a lot of ways. As Rick
uses it, it is primarily a protective thingy. To have loads of DST,DSB, WSB
and WST's and then surmount them with 3 day and 15 day "withins" to only get
to a "pre-confirmed" place where the trade is over before "confirmed" occurs
is such a limited mileux of greyness. To cap it off with a set up that is
not even able to "see" consolidation and, at the same time, lag by 50% of
more of trades in the market pace in terms of protective stops and not ever
exit on anything but protective stops, makes it just a random exercise from
top to bottom.
Analysis -- Fdates and Wdates 3 and 15 day grey areas
Entries --one tick offsets from prior day's H/L
Protection --one tick offsets from prior day's L/L
Exits --One old stops that loose one day of a trend automatically.
Monitoring --Not done or presumed to be needed.
Market Pace --Not used and ignored.
Reversals --Unusable at this point.
Money velocity-- very low at best.
The wheat, hogs, beans and now copper were all just one big mess.
Jack Hershey
">
> Jack - why bother?
It is important to review this again as you suggest. Rick has a less than
stellar algorithm. Criticizing it is easily done in a variety of ways. Your
posts are criticism for example. Occasionally they feature spelling in their
upper reaches. I may criticise as a secondary point or level; primarily, I
clarify with alternatives that can replace the handicaps Rick has created
for others.
You missed he following apparently:
I said:
>> I found I could not comment directly in the copper discussion. Mostly
because your postings did not have any provision
>> for response on the remote site. I now understand that I should post
here.
Rick replied:
> Such a quick learner.
I'm not a quick learner. I actually thought that there would be an exchange
of views vis a vis Rick, members, and MIF persons under his hospitality.
Rick suggests that I do it and bother to do it here. You do not contribute
substantively as is your want. I am a contributor that you dissagree with
here on MIF. You have reasons for not doing what I actualy do. That makes
us different. I do not expect you to see nor understand my views nor
reasons for anything at all.
I am bothering because it is important to me to help others. You do not
think I help. Kewl. Maybe others do and I am particualrly interested in
Rick's members who may be desiring help. None of them post here with Rick
and so far who knows how and what they post ever.
Everyone knows you are a bumbling old fool who has lost
> his mind. Take a break and tell your nurse you want to go nite-nite.
Posting this comment makes you feel better. Enjoy. I enjoy being older;
and it suits me just fine. for me posting here is taking a break. So is
going over Rick's copper stuff. I always learn alot from delving into
things. That's what bothering is all about. That's why you are reading my
words all the time. If you had the stamina I have you might be able to post
something here someday. Don't give up on making a contribution along with
your criticisms. Bother to do something more once a month.
Jack Hershey
I actually thought about the stuff (content) too. Two parts are a replay
one each other and the idea of working with the stuff from concept to detail
appeals. The three concepts I saw are the ones you get, however.
I change the headers because I have learned that what I am talking about is
better placed under the specific subject headings. "Speechless Jack" is
great humor but we all have had the laugh already. I am using MIF headers
instead.
I think the citation shorthand is a good alternative too. You can just leaf
the pages and count paragraphs. The fact that it is acrobat is another drag
for me.
A very important sequence is going on over the months here. The expression
that: "You can learn from your mistakes" is very important. I am spending
several months to articulate a very good alternative to a peculiar method of
making money that is being proffered here by a vendor. Now, he is being
constrained by the situation in many ways as you can see. They seem to be
of his own choosing. Now a days you see graphics of what is going on. That
is new. If he begins to label them that will be new too. I put mine up
fully labeled and annotated to not make that mistake. The trades being taken
on are now not so much after the fact. We don't know the specifics of
copper, for example, but we have gotten to the place where the "rules" for
"set ups" are there. Each step in the sequence in this forum is leading
directly to a solution of the contemporary problem as well.
My focus is "learning from my mistakes". So far, I am only doing a money
velocity four times greater than Rick with The Alternative. I like to go
from plateau to plateau of improvements. There are 8 basic shifts of
performance coming up where each one "fixes" a mistake. Generically, Rick
is getting what needs fixing on the table more and more each episode. In
investing the up side often takes care of itself. It is the downside
ingrained flaws that a person cannot see that prevents a person from moving
onward and upward. Thus I have a place from which to depart; if it
improves, then my performance can be compared to the better performance. If
it goes along unchanging in excellence, then the reference may be thought of
as a constant of some ilk.
Also, there is a little noise here. I love being baited as an opportunity
to make points back in MIF land; Rick is a foil par excellence. Ken is
preoccupied with my age. I am glad to let him persist; it allows me to move
along getting the job done and, occasionally, just use his posts to
reiterate my purpose since he keeps bringing up queries as to why and what I
am doing. He is a nice little foil for me to use over and over. If he
corrects spelling etc, so much the better.
"ynotssor" <ynotssorAT hotmaildot `\rm -rf /` com> wrote in message
news:3cd57...@corp-news.newsgroups.com...
Ken Johnson
">
> You missed he following apparently:
What??? "You missed he following apparently" Jack, you seem to become more
infirm daily. Please take your medicine and tell the nurse you want to go
nite-nite
Fdate Trader
paragraph.
Stick with what you really know, and leave the rest to the professionals.
You make way too many assumptions, and it takes more time than I have to
correct every one of them on a daily basis, about the frequency you make
such assumptions.
The rest is up to the individual.
--
Rick J. Ratchford
Precision Trading Membership
http://fdates.com
==============================
CURRENT TRADING BOOK DEALS - http://fdates.com/book_offer.htm
"Jack Hershey" <jhers...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:uahB8.31643$9c5.1...@news2.west.cox.net...
Fdate Trader
you watch prices all day. He does not understand that there is more than one
way to skin a cat.
The assumption he makes is that it is either Jack's way or the highway. With
such limited choices, we'd do much better with the highway during rush hour.
Fortunately, we have choices.
What I really find bizarre is that Jack makes statement as to what the
thinks I will do as if it will indeed happen that way. Is he taking
personalized predictions a bit too far? Most definitely.
(i.e. "If 5/3 goes "up" Rick takes these profits.")
Jack, is there enough activity in your life that you might spend more time
on them rather than making me the highlight of your life? Get a girlfriend
and take her to the show or something. It will do you good.
--
Rick J. Ratchford
Precision Trading Membership
http://fdates.com
==============================
CURRENT TRADING BOOK DEALS - http://fdates.com/book_offer.htm
"Jack Hershey" <jhers...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:WlgB8.31237$9c5.1...@news2.west.cox.net...
Fdate Trader
"Jack Hershey" <jhers...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:I5iB8.32136$9c5.1...@news2.west.cox.net...
> Well I did think of moving the three parts here.
>
> I actually thought about the stuff (content) too. Two parts are a replay
> one each other and the idea of working with the stuff from concept to
detail
> appeals. The three concepts I saw are the ones you get, however.
Translated using a Universal Translator: KVslsp svi Yusss. Shveek donks ve
shmuckie UuIimme!
Personally, I find the translation so much easier to understand.
> I change the headers because I have learned that what I am talking about
is
> better placed under the specific subject headings. "Speechless Jack" is
> great humor but we all have had the laugh already. I am using MIF headers
> instead.
MIF headers. Will it fit my 302? Is it 'anti-warp'?
> I think the citation shorthand is a good alternative too. You can just
leaf
> the pages and count paragraphs. The fact that it is acrobat is another
drag
> for me.
"shorthand" and "drag". Or is "drag" short for "dragging on", which would
require that you really think about "shorthand" notation. In other words,
why do you write 10 paragraphs that can fit in one?
> A very important sequence is going on over the months here. The
expression
> that: "You can learn from your mistakes" is very important. I am spending
> several months to articulate a very good alternative to a peculiar method
of
> making money that is being proffered here by a vendor.
It would take serveral months just to iron out what you are talking about,
especially when you can't even get the method you are trying to design an
alternative for correct in your head.
> Now, he is being constrained by the situation in many ways as you can
see. They seem to be
> of his own choosing. Now a days you see graphics of what is going on.
That
> is new. If he begins to label them that will be new too. I put mine up
> fully labeled and annotated to not make that mistake.
How come all those labels and annotations still make your point...pointless?
> The trades being taken on are now not so much after the fact. We don't
know the specifics of
> copper, for example, but we have gotten to the place where the "rules" for
> "set ups" are there. Each step in the sequence in this forum is leading
> directly to a solution of the contemporary problem as well.
Such a logical approach to trade entry, and all you can afford to offer us
is a hindsight dissection of what has already occurred, rather than provide
us with some 'beforehand' examples as I've gladly done. Why the limitations
on your 'alternative', Jack? Would it be because the last time you attempted
to demonstrate your 'alternative' beforehand, you ended up losing in
whipsawed trades?
> My focus is "learning from my mistakes".
Stay focused then. You have a lot more to learn.
> So far, I am only doing a money velocity four times greater than Rick
with The Alternative.
In your dreams Jack.
> I like to go from plateau to plateau of improvements. There are 8 basic
shifts of
> performance coming up where each one "fixes" a mistake. Generically, Rick
> is getting what needs fixing on the table more and more each episode. In
> investing the up side often takes care of itself. It is the downside
> ingrained flaws that a person cannot see that prevents a person from
moving
> onward and upward.
Pass the Pepto Bismo please.
> Thus I have a place from which to depart; if it improves, then my
performance can be compared to the better performance. If
> it goes along unchanging in excellence, then the reference may be thought
of
> as a constant of some ilk.
Too late...
> Also, there is a little noise here. I love being baited as an opportunity
> to make points back in MIF land; Rick is a foil par excellence. Ken is
> preoccupied with my age. I am glad to let him persist; it allows me to
move
> along getting the job done and, occasionally, just use his posts to
> reiterate my purpose since he keeps bringing up queries as to why and what
I
> am doing. He is a nice little foil for me to use over and over. If he
> corrects spelling etc, so much the better.
Oooh. Is there a Doctor in the house?
Fdate Trader
>
> ">
> > Jack - why bother?
>
> It is important to review this again as you suggest. Rick has a less than
> stellar algorithm.
Says the babbling fool.
> Criticizing it is easily done in a variety of ways.
1. Under the influence of alcohol.
2. Under the influence of meds.
3. While running naked in the street with aluminum foil on your head.
....
> Your posts are criticism for example. Occasionally they feature spelling
in their
> upper reaches. I may criticise as a secondary point or level; primarily,
I
> clarify with alternatives that can replace the handicaps Rick has created
> for others.
Don't blame me for your handicap. Nobody told you to sniff glue. You did
that on your own.
> You missed he following apparently:
>
> I said:
>
> >> I found I could not comment directly in the copper discussion. Mostly
> because your postings did not have any provision for response on the
remote site. I now understand that I should post
> here.
>
> Rick replied:
>
> > Such a quick learner.
>
> I'm not a quick learner.
Noooo. You kidding me? You really had me there Jack.
> I actually thought that there would be an exchange
> of views vis a vis Rick, members, and MIF persons under his hospitality.
Sorry Jack. If we let you into our fold, we'd have to start passing out 3-D
glasses to everyone and playing "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds".
> Rick suggests that I do it and bother to do it here. You do not
contribute
> substantively as is your want. I am a contributor that you dissagree with
> here on MIF.
And the line gets bigger everyday.
> You have reasons for not doing what I actualy do. That makes
> us different. I do not expect you to see nor understand my views nor
> reasons for anything at all.
What a guy. A method is demonstrated in real-time where profits are
accumulating and losses very small. And Jack works real hard in hindsight to
try and produce an 'alternative'. What, can't Jack just make it work in
real-time and be happy with it? Guess not. Wonder why we just don't
understand his views.
> I am bothering because it is important to me to help others.
Now where did I put that bottle of Pepto Bismo again?
> You do not think I help.
I don't either. You spend way too much time trying to sway individuals away
from what has been demonstrated in real-time as an effective method of
trading, using hindsight reasoning. You assume everyone who trades should
watch their monitors each day during trading hours. Wrong!
> Kewl. Maybe others do and I am particualrly interested in Rick's members
who may be desiring help. None of them post here with Rick
> and so far who knows how and what they post ever.
From those members I've heard from, they think you need help.
> Everyone knows you are a bumbling old fool who has lost
> > his mind. Take a break and tell your nurse you want to go nite-nite.
>
> Posting this comment makes you feel better. Enjoy.
Made me feel pretty good also. It was like I was thinking it and then
someone else comes out and actually says it. Kewl.
> I enjoy being older; and it suits me just fine. for me posting here is
taking a break. So is
> going over Rick's copper stuff. I always learn alot from delving into
> things. That's what bothering is all about. That's why you are reading
my
> words all the time. If you had the stamina I have you might be able to
post
> something here someday. Don't give up on making a contribution along with
> your criticisms. Bother to do something more once a month.
Hey Jack, some advice.
If you want to help others, then just share what you think you know. Do not
use others as your reference, because this assumes you know something about
the other and most of the time you fail miserably in getting it right. So
save us all the grief and just talk your TA and nothing more. If you
continue to refer to others, like myself, then that is not considered being
constructive but instead to be attacking. Since I am immune to attacks,
having to deal with it for over 6 years now, you gain nothing by it.
Make better use of your Golden years Jack.
Rick
craig wisper
craig wisper
> Because you said so many things here Jack, I'll sum up my reply in one
quick
> paragraph.
>
> Stick with what you really know, and leave the rest to the professionals.
> You make way too many assumptions, and it takes more time than I have to
> correct every one of them on a daily basis, about the frequency you make
> such assumptions.
>
> The rest is up to the individual.
>
> --
>
May I translate,
[Stick with what you really know] = trading
[and leave the rest to the professionals.] = professional spam
Rick why are you here?
Trolling for losers?
craig wisper
> having to deal with it for over 6 years now, >
6 years of spam, this poor MIF.
Fdate Trader
"Jack Hershey" <jhers...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:B2gB8.31057$9c5.1...@news2.west.cox.net...
> I will ocassionally cite references. The three part reference is: Roman
> numeral for part, -number for page and -number for paragraph as printed
out
> using the original extension.
>
> The copper posts cover four days:
>
> day 1-Friday 26th-- post of 28th called part I
> day 2 monday 29th --post after close on 29th called part II
> day 3 tuesday 30th
> day 4 wednseday 1st-- post after close on the 2nd.
Without verifying it, sounds right.
> There are seven letters used to form acronyms:
> B -- bottom
> C --confirmed.
> D -- daily
> L -- Last
> S-- swing
> T --top
> W -- Week.
Yes, I think you got that right too. Do they make sense to you, or should
other letters be used?
> There is a report that contains stuff Rick uses:
> F date report -- It contains stuff that is currently in effect.
It is what all members use, actually. It contains the names of 21 markets.
The front month traded. The next rollover dates as per the data provider
(Pinnacle Data Corp.), 3 columns of Wdates (weekly cycle dates), with the
first column being the most recently passed Wdate and the following the next
two due to occur. Two columns for Fdates (daily cycle dates), where the
first column is the most recently passed Fdate (of the prior week) and the
second column containing the next two weeks worth. The next 10 columns
represent the individual days of the week, MTWTF MTWTF, where an x is placed
below the day represented by an Fdate listed in the prior column already
described. A date is allowed to be off one day (Fdates). However, there are
many that have a smaller window, and are plotted on the last 10 columns with
parentheses, such as (x _) Note: The "_" is there to denote a space in this
message only. This would inform the member to expect the cycle turn on time,
or possibly one day late only.
> The term "within" is used.
>
> A day in time is "within" either Fdates and/or Wdates.
The term "within" is used to describe that a turn has occurred inside
(within) the dates window of influence. So if the Fdate is 4/20 and it can
be a day off, a turn either on 4/20 or within a day of that date is
considered "within" its time window. For those denoted with parentheses,
that window is smaller.
> Fdates including end points include 3 days. Before during and after the
date
> stated. Thus and date of the market may be included in three Fdates.
Many are two days. But more importantly, if based on our Guidelines we can
only trade cycle tops short, that 3 day window becomes much, much smaller as
you ignore any price bars "within" that period that cannot possibly form a
top, such as a lower low/high price bar. Too many here not knowing how we
look for setups fail to see the significance of this isolating approach and
its effectiveness.
> Wdates including end points include 15 business days. They are all Friday
> dates. Count back nine more daysfrom 4/26 to the 4/15.(a Monday) and
count
> ahead to 5/3 for five days (a Friday).
That is your weekly turn window. Treated like Fdates, it presents no problem
either. Used with Fdates, they allow us to jump on new trends before most
even know one is developing. Wdates serve one purpose only. They allow us to
anticipate new trends. Otherwise, we trade in the direction away from the
last weekly turn.
> See I-4-2 for the citation. If you use consecutive Fridays as Wdates you
can easily see that any given day is
> "within" 3 Wdates just like any given day is within 3 Fdates.
"If" is a big word. Use it carefully. Never have 3 consecutive Fridays been
called a Wdate. Also, you are making assumptions about spacing. They vary,
just like the actual market turns vary that they represent. Here is where
you fail to understand the reality from the imagined. You imagine it is done
one way, when in reality it is not.
> Thus there is a huge blurr of dates at all times.
Only in your blurred mind Jack. Considering that, just like the Copper
lesson Parts 1 to 3, I've demonstrated clearly that by using the dates
properly, you can isolate the beginning of a new trend before it actually
forms. Now as you look back, you can see that I am right once again on this.
Additionally, our members see me do this on a regular basis. Thus, you can
also throw out luck with your assumptions.
> This brings up three terms:
>
> Potential
> Pre-confirmed
> Confirmed.
>
> The copper exposition takes place in a setting:
>
> The LCWS is a WSB which set a status of a "confirmed" long trend.
Not a confirmed long trend Jack. It only sets the stage that we can look for
Buy setups on the daily chart if one presents itself. Trend is time
relative. If you are referring to the weekly trend, a confirmed weekly swing
bottom (WSB) does not imply the weekly trend is now bullish. You are in
error here. It may simply be the beginning of a weekly correction of a
bearish trend. But when you trade the daily time frame, those weekly
corrections can last many weeks and so we take advantage of them at the
early stages of their development. Wdates helps in this regard if the weekly
swing has yet to be confirmed.
> Most other methods using TA or mecahnics agree here. The trend depicted
is an
> intermediate trem trend; and the depiction is "long".
This is not true either. Most TA methods require much more before you
pronounce the weekly trend as bullish. At this point, most still think
prices are moving lower and thus most end up on the wrong side of the
trades.
> F dates cannot ever "confirm" a contemporary trading trend on a given day
that is any less than
> an intermediate trend.
Fdates NEVER confirms a trend. That is not their design. They pinpoint
setups based on either the LCWS, or in the case that there is also a Wdate
present, an opposing setup where no weekly swing has been confirmed as of
yet.
> Part I and its exact repeat with respect to the last bar, Part II deal
with
> "pre-confirmed" stauses where thay address short term trends, not
> intermediate term trends. The pre-confirmed trend as the two bars have
> higher highs is called a "short"
Here is where I need my Universal Translator again. You were doing so well
up to now making some correct notes and many incorrect assumptions. At least
I could recognize what you were doing. Here, well, its all Greek to me.
Pre-confirmation is simple once understood.
If the LCWS happens to be a WSB, then we are only interested in setups
within an Fdate time window that provide for BUYING opportunities only. If a
Wdate happens to be present where an opposing weekly swing could form, and
we get a pattern just like that shown in the Copper lessons, that is the
only time we can trade a SELL (when the LCWS = WSB). Such a setup is called
a "pre-confirmation setup" because it is based on a weekly swing that has
yet to confirm. We're merely anticipating it will confirm because;
1. The new weekly high is within a Wdate time window and has then the
potential to form a WST.
2. It is followed by a potential lower top on the daily chart that is within
an Fdate window, which is our "pre-confirmation" sell setup.
This is the ONLY time Wdates comes into play. All other times, we only care
what the LCWS happens to be, and since it has already confirmed as a swing,
obviously we don't need a date to tell us that. We now trade the daily cycle
dates following the confirmed weekly swing to the conclusion of the trend or
gettting stopped out.
> "Potential" is a word used to descrbe whether the situation more inclided
to
> something. Think "probable" when you see "potential" used specifically
with
> respect to "long" or "short" assertions to characterize what is
> "pre-confirmed" or "confirmed".
Each price bar that makes a higher high than the bar before it has the
"potential" to form a swing top. That is a given. However, when using cycle
dates as we do, those price bars that make a higher high inside the time
window of one of these dates has a very high probability of doing so.
So instead of just placing sell orders below the low of any price bar that
makes a higher high, we focus only on those that form within a cycle date
time window and follow the conventions of a trend pattern. In other words,
we don't sell below a price bar that makes a higher high, even if it occurs
within a cycle date, unless that price bar's high has the potential to form
a lower 'swing top' than the prior 'swing top'. This is due to the fact that
bear trends make lower swing tops and lower swing bottoms, and such we avoid
'picking exact tops' to short, but only identifying them early and
capitalizing on them at the first probability of a lower swing top within a
cycle date. This gets us into new trends early (as noted with the Copper
lesson provided here), with very low risk that we know before actually
placing the trade, and good profit opportunity because of how early we enter
the new trend.
> Finally, bar length. The bar length is the crucial stepping off point.
> These hi/lo things occur within the O/C values. They are lagging values.
A
> value of "one tick" beyond the H/L values is part of orders and associated
> strategy. Thus any entry, if made, is prtected by a stop that for that
day
> creates a "loss" two clicks longer than the volatility of the prior bar.
> But unstated and unused in this method, as noted in the past there are
three
> other methods for replacing this situation.(Most of which are designed to
> preserve the continuation of the trade by loosening stops.)
This is only partially correct. He made his mistake once again by assuming
that there are 3 other methods or 'loosening' stops.
First, the 'initial stop-loss' is based on where the new swing top price
happens to be, or the new swing bottom price. The stop is placed 1 tick
beyond this newly confirmed swing top or bottom. This is logical for one
very simple reason. If that top is formed due to a cycle turn, because we
identified it early by a cycle date, then obviously a move beyond that new
swing top or bottom would violate this. Suppose that a swing top forms
today. Well, we would think then that price would move down until it forms a
swing bottom next. But if the next day were to bounce up and take out that
top of the prior day, then obviously that prior day high is not a swing top,
is it? So you'd want out as it has violated the trading plan.
Trades are not preserved by loosening stops. Stops are basically the choice
of the trader only. Suggestions are provided, however, once the trade has
been initiated and the initial stop-loss used. As price progresses deeper
into profit, the trader then must make a decision when and where to move the
stop to capture those profits if the market were to turn and stop him/her
out. Trend lines can be used, but my favorite approach and one I teach often
is using T/P squares and Gann Angles. They have time and time again proven
very effective in adjusting stops. Bottom line though is that is it the
traders discretion and my suggestions do not need to be take beyond the
entry point and initial stop. (actually, nothing I say has to be done. I
cannot tell anyone that they must trade this way or that, of course.)
Jack is assuming a 'loosening stop' strategy because of a Live Cattle trade
I was long in some time ago. He noted that I had the stop at .87 one day,
then the next day moved it down to .80 while long.
The problem Jack has here is that he does not understand Market Geometry ala
Gann. The market had corrected against my position, taking away some of my
accumulated profits. My stop at .87 was below a DECLINING support line,
where each day that line is moving lower in price. Price hit this line the
day I placed my stop below it at .87. The next day, that line was just above
.80 and so I moved my stop down to it to REMAIN BELOW THE DECLINING LINE.
Price went and hit my stop before continuing up again. I was 1 tick in
error. Had it been placed at .77 instead, I'd have captured much more of
this move.
In Jack's case, he would have been stopped out at the higher price of .87,
because his principles disallows him to acknowledge the dynamics involved
here. He would have certainly have missed the rest of this move after that
correction, whereas if I had a good opportunity to stay in the trade if not
for the 1-tick error. It happens, but Jack has formulated in his head that
what we do is move our stop lower and lower every day as price moves against
us. That is purely ridiculous. The bottom that hit my stop was inside an
Fdate, and so I KNEW it would likely resume which it did. Had it not, I am
stopped out just 3 ticks less than the day before, big deal. But once
outside that cycle date time window, there is no adjusting even along a
declining Gann angle, because the time for turning has elapsed.
> This scopes out the basics. Except for the daily 3 step process which
> involves both Fdates and Wdates from the FDates Report combined and LCWS's
> and "within's", "pre-confirms", "confirms" and "potentials".
What I have said actually scopes out the basics. Jack is still learning, as
he says, he is a slow learner and it takes so many emails to help this guy
get it right. Or is he really not interested in getting it right? Who knows.
Gtrader33
already! I can analyze the entire grain market in less time it takes to read
one of your posts.
Jim Cochrane
name calling with no substance. If there are any substantial points in the
post, it takes great effort (which I find I'm not willing to expend) to get
to them.
These are the kinds of posts that lower the signal to noise ratio and
discourage people from reading newsgroups, even if other posts contain
valuable advice or information. If you are posting this way because you
are angry, you will gain a lot more respect from readers of your posts
if you take a break before posting, calm down, and respond maturely with
substantial points.
In article <telB8.9409$Dx3....@nwrddc02.gnilink.net>,
--
Jim Cochrane
j...@dimensional.com
[When responding by email, include the term non-spam in the subject line to
get through my spam filter.]
Jack Hershey
"Gtrader33" <gtra...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020506005713...@mb-fx.aol.com...
What is your current take?
Posting is slow I guess.