Jump to content

Welcome to the new Traders Laboratory! Please bear with us as we finish the migration over the next few days. If you find any issues, want to leave feedback, get in touch with us, or offer suggestions please post to the Support forum here.

  • Welcome Guests

    Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at Traders Laboratory such as interacting with members, access to all forums, downloading attachments, and eligibility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE Traders Laboratory account here.

brownsfan019

Futures I Trade Show & Brooks Book

Recommended Posts

  ACS said:
When the market is trending it will try to break the trend but most attempts fail and the trend resumes; that is a pullback. Sometimes the failure stops before it makes new highs/lows in the trend and it then reverses back in the direction of the breakout. In other words the failed breakout fails and becomes a breakout pullback in the new trend. Often there will be a period of uncertainty whether it is just a pullback in the old trend or a breakout pullback in a new trend until the market tips its hand by further price action.

 

Thanks, ACS. I was complicating it a bit. The explanation in Chapter 6 is pretty clear, but the definition in the glossary is baffling. But, Al Rules!

 

Basically, when a breakout fails, we don't know if it's just a failure or if it's actually a breakout pullback until we see if it has just "failed" and the prevailing move resumes, or if it makes a 3rd leg in the direction of the previous breakout, then it turns out it was a breakout pullback after all.

 

So, it's impossible to actually name that "elbow" precisely until we see what happens, right?

 

Thanks for your help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  dbandas said:
Thanks, ACS. I was complicating it a bit. The explanation in Chapter 6 is pretty clear, but the definition in the glossary is baffling. But, Al Rules!

 

Basically, when a breakout fails, we don't know if it's just a failure or if it's actually a breakout pullback until we see if it has just "failed" and the prevailing move resumes, or if it makes a 3rd leg in the direction of the previous breakout, then it turns out it was a breakout pullback after all.

 

So, it's impossible to actually name that "elbow" precisely until we see what happens, right?

 

Thanks for your help.

 

That is my very basic understanding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like Al has decided to pull the plug on his web site. There is a lot of really good information there and it will be missed. I hope he changes his mind and just posts end of day charts that don't interfere with his trading but if not you should save a copy of anything that is helpful to you before it disappears.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm working my way through the book, and it is incredibly worthwhile to me. Previously, for daytrading, I had subscribed to the expensive indicator philosophy which definitely works for some. It didn't for me. I was frustrated because I wasn't learning anything.

 

Anyway, some suggestions. I listened several times to the two Al Brooks audio/video presentations made through Futures Magazine. Also, I read the articles, about five, several times. I listened to a radio show. All of this acclimated me to the concepts and the lingo so that the book is decipherable. Also, I discovered it is essential for me to print out the charts in the book, because flipping pages with a magnifying glass didn't work very well.

 

Good luck!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  ACS said:
Looks like Al has decided to pull the plug on his web site. There is a lot of really good information there and it will be missed. I hope he changes his mind and just posts end of day charts that don't interfere with his trading but if not you should save a copy of anything that is helpful to you before it disappears.

 

Yes, I hate to see that. But, it was helpful while it lasted. Especially the link to the charts in the books.

 

I would really love to see him post at the end of the day and do a post-mortem. Even a few days a week.... Or some new articles occasionally. I can't memorize everything he says, but every time I work through a chart I flex my own interpretation muscles a bit and learn to think more clearly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Blowfish

 

Think it all reflects on Al's integrity, shows that he is a genuine trader, he could have easily gone on to establish trading rooms and pulled in a crowd. Afterall he already has a large following.

The book is not particularly well written and also the layout need much to be desired, however it is packed with gems of price observations devoid of any indicators.

 

It would be great if Al could be persuaded to post some end of day charts with his comments, would prove highly educational.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone tell me if there was an ES short signal @~1010.00 right near the open at 9;30EST on Fri via this method? I am trying to see if I am understanding it with any accuracy. Thx.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  emmster said:
Can someone tell me if there was an ES short signal @~1010.00 right near the open at 9;30EST on Fri via this method? I am trying to see if I am understanding it with any accuracy. Thx.

 

Using the methods described in the book, the first trade of the day was an L1 short at 1008.25 off the 1st bear trend bar. The next trade I saw was also an L1 short at 1004.50 off the 4th & 5th double bottom bear bars. Any trade around 1010.00 was before the first 5 minute bar of the day closed and thus was not compatible with my understanding of Al's methodology since it was too early to look at a lower time frame for setups, the market not yet having proven itself in a strong trend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the short after the 4th bar, since it is a "twin" or double bottom, and an L1-type pause in a fast-moving bear. The 3-minute chart corroborates this.

 

I would never have placed a trade after the first bar on the 5-minute. On the 3-minute, there was a little pause made by the 3rd bull candle, but it's not a bad signal bar for a bullish gap play or H1. Actually, these initial moves often cause me confusion, and in the case of this 3rd bullish bar on the 3-minute, an entry on either side could be argued, IMHO.

 

And, all of the previous ramblings prove you don't have to be a successful trader to talk or write about it, especially after the fact!!!! :haha:

 

Just trying to claw my way out of the middle class........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  ACS said:
Using the methods described in the book, the first trade of the day was an L1 short at 1008.25 off the 1st bear trend bar. The next trade I saw was also an L1 short at 1004.50 off the 4th & 5th double bottom bear bars. Any trade around 1010.00 was before the first 5 minute bar of the day closed and thus was not compatible with my understanding of Al's methodology since it was too early to look at a lower time frame for setups, the market not yet having proven itself in a strong trend.

 

Thanks for the reply. I just started reviewing some of the posts and wanted to see if I had a rudimentary understanding. The difficult thing for me is knowing where he resets his count, so I saw the 1008.5 as a L2 and the next as L3. This might become clearer to me later. Thanks for the info.

AB01.png.b49ff6a5d4824cbf43a14d540fbc75c1.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  emmster said:
Thanks for the reply. I just started reviewing some of the posts and wanted to see if I had a rudimentary understanding. The difficult thing for me is knowing where he resets his count, so I saw the 1008.5 as a L2 and the next as L3. This might become clearer to me later. Thanks for the info.

 

I was a little confused because you are on the Globex chart, and I was looking at the day chart. At any rate, your numbering looks fine to me, but I think your entry may be a little confused. If the bull bar at 8:30 is the signal pullback bar that creates your L2, the entry would be at one tick below it, or 1009.25, not at one tick below the next bar, which is your entry bar.

 

I was getting confused switching between Globex and the day session chart, so I just abandoned Globex except to see where the gap may be. Al suggests imagining the gap as a trend bar, and I actually use my drawing tool to draw one in. He also takes about the charting dilemma somewhere, maybe his website.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  dbandas said:
I agree with the short after the 4th bar, since it is a "twin" or double bottom, and an L1-type pause in a fast-moving bear. The 3-minute chart corroborates this.

 

I would never have placed a trade after the first bar on the 5-minute. On the 3-minute, there was a little pause made by the 3rd bull candle, but it's not a bad signal bar for a bullish gap play or H1. Actually, these initial moves often cause me confusion, and in the case of this 3rd bullish bar on the 3-minute, an entry on either side could be argued, IMHO.

 

And, all of the previous ramblings prove you don't have to be a successful trader to talk or write about it, especially after the fact!!!! :haha:

 

Just trying to claw my way out of the middle class........

 

I took the L1 off the first 5 minute bar and it turned out to be a good trade. I'll admit I wasn't thrilled with the size of the tails, had they been even a tick bigger I would have passed but since I was selling after a gap down I decided to go with it. In the book Al says to only use 3 minutes for with trend entries in a strong trend. To me that means you would not be looking at the 3 minute chart until at least a few 5 minute bars had already passed, you knew the market was in a strong trend, and you were not seeing any 5 minute entries. Just the 5 minute is challenging enough for me!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  dbandas said:
I was a little confused because you are on the Globex chart, and I was looking at the day chart. At any rate, your numbering looks fine to me, but I think your entry may be a little confused. If the bull bar at 8:30 is the signal pullback bar that creates your L2, the entry would be at one tick below it, or 1009.25, not at one tick below the next bar, which is your entry bar.

 

I was getting confused switching between Globex and the day session chart, so I just abandoned Globex except to see where the gap may be. Al suggests imagining the gap as a trend bar, and I actually use my drawing tool to draw one in. He also takes about the charting dilemma somewhere, maybe his website.

 

Sorry, but I thought the requirement for the L2 was a high that is higher than the previous bar. (?) The low of the L2 bar-1 tick is 1008.25

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  ACS said:
In the book Al says to only use 3 minutes for with trend entries in a strong trend. To me that means you would not be looking at the 3 minute chart until at least a few 5 minute bars had already passed, you knew the market was in a strong trend, and you were not seeing any 5 minute entries. Just the 5 minute is challenging enough for me!

 

Busted! I agree completely, and Al states that clearly in the trend chapter, that the 3-minute is useful in runaway markets to discover pauses or pullback opportunities. I've just missed some first hour moves due to inexperience/reticence lately, and read this in Chapter 11:

 

"Although the 5-minute chart is the easiest to read and the most reliable, the 3-minute chart trades well, particularly in the first hour. However, it is prone to more losers, and if you like the highest winning percentage and don't want the negative emotion that comes from losing, you should stick to trading the 5-minute chart and work on increasing your position size."

 

Al is so right-on about the opportunities in the first hour or so, and I've not been able to always hop on the train.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An L2 entry would be the result of a low that is lower than the deepest bar in the pullback and not higher than the high. That would be H1, H2 territory.

 

Here, the bullish bar at 8:30 should really have a low that is higher than the low of the previous bar, but it is an "implied" pullback.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The glossary refers to these as reversal patterns, particularly after an over-extended market, and the first chapter basically says that they often develop during flags, and to be alert to trading them either way.

 

How's this different from any other flag? Seems to be an implication that flags with ii or iii formations may fail more often.

 

Am I missing something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone who has spent time with Al's book knows Wiley did an awful job of editing and proofreading. There are many typos in the book. Some are just grammatical and do not affect the content value but there are some that do. On his web site Al says he will correct them in any second edition. I feel that IF there is a second edition it will only be because people bought the first edition and they should not be penalized for doing so. Therefore I am listing the known errors I have found so far and encourage others to add to this list.

 

Page 34 3rd Paragraph:

“not the Bar 6” number should be 8

 

Page 123 3rd Paragraph:

"but Bar 17 was a bear" the chart was mislabeled Bar 17 should have been the bar before

 

Page 158 1st Line:

"but at least its close was above" should be "above the midpoint"

 

Page 205 2nd Paragraph

"bar 10, was above" should be Bar 9

 

Page 238

“Bar 12 was a bad bull reversal” should be bar 11

 

Page 245 2nd Paragraph

“countertrend bar (bar 9)” Should be (the bar before bar 9)

2nd to last Paragraph:

"bar 3 in figure 9.24 was a huge bear trend bar that followed four "

last word should be three

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  ACS said:
Anyone who has spent time with Al's book knows Wiley did an awful job of editing and proofreading. There are many typos in the book. Some are just grammatical and do not affect the content value but there are some that do. On his web site Al says he will correct them in any second edition. I feel that IF there is a second edition it will only be because people bought the first edition and they should not be penalized for doing so. Therefore I am listing the known errors I have found so far and encourage others to add to this list.

 

Page 34 3rd Paragraph:

“not the Bar 6” number should be 8

 

Page 123 3rd Paragraph:

"but Bar 17 was a bear" the chart was mislabeled Bar 17 should have been the bar before

 

Page 158 1st Line:

"but at least its close was above" should be "above the midpoint"

 

Page 205 2nd Paragraph

"bar 10, was above" should be Bar 9

 

Page 238

“Bar 12 was a bad bull reversal” should be bar 11

 

Page 245 2nd Paragraph

“countertrend bar (bar 9)” Should be (the bar before bar 9)

2nd to last Paragraph:

"bar 3 in figure 9.24 was a huge bear trend bar that followed four "

last word should be three

 

So frustrating to be trying to learn new concepts and have to be constantly filtering every sentence for possible errors - "Did he really mean what he is saying here or is this another mistake"

 

BTW, Al says he is discontinuing his web site - too much distraction from trading.

 

Al: "I will therefore be shutting this site down in a week or so and return to my trading cave to work on my trading goals."

 

Makes me wonder if he is having problems with his trading. Seems like he was looking for another source of income from his web site, why would he do that if he was successful trading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  mikea59 said:

Makes me wonder if he is having problems with his trading. Seems like he was looking for another source of income from his web site, why would he do that if he was successful trading.

 

I conclude the opposite: why would a successful trader allow themselves to be distracted? I take it at face value and appreciate what Al offered there.

 

Definitely a tricky book, but by the time it gets a better edit, I'll be rich beyond caring..........:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  mikea59 said:
Makes me wonder if he is having problems with his trading. Seems like he was looking for another source of income from his web site, why would he do that if he was successful trading.

 

He could have easily gone the route of a paid website/chatroom, tutoring, DVDs, etc but instead decided to go back to just trading his account. He says he wants to trade institutional size which he describes in the book as 100 contracts. I wish him luck and hope he changes his mind enough to just post end of day charts; something that will not interfere with trading during the day but would be of immense help to the many people who bought the book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  ACS said:
He could have easily gone the route of a paid website/chatroom, tutoring, DVDs, etc but instead decided to go back to just trading his account. He says he wants to trade institutional size which he describes in the book as 100 contracts. I wish him luck and hope he changes his mind enough to just post end of day charts; something that will not interfere with trading during the day but would be of immense help to the many people who bought the book.

 

Rather then complaining you should focus on your own trading. If you can't read the signals end of day you should re-read the book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Thx for reminding us... I don't bang that drum often enough anymore Another part for consideration is who that money initially went to...
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • How long does it take to receive HFM's withdrawal via Skrill? less than 24H?
    • My wife Robin just wanted some groceries.   Simple enough.   She parked the car for fifteen minutes, and returned to find a huge scratch on the side.   Someone keyed her car.   To be clear, this isn’t just any car.   It’s a Cybertruck—Elon Musk's stainless-steel spaceship on wheels. She bought it back in 2021, before Musk became everyone's favorite villain or savior.   Someone saw it parked in a grocery lot and felt compelled to carve their hatred directly into the metal.   That's what happens when you stand out.   Nobody keys a beige minivan.   When you're polarizing, you're impossible to ignore. But the irony is: the more attention something has, the harder it is to find the truth about it.   What’s Elon Musk really thinking? What are his plans? What will happen with DOGE? Is he deserving of all of this adoration and hate? Hard to say.   Ideas work the same way.   Take tariffs, for example.   Tariffs have become the Cybertrucks of economic policy. People either love them or hate them. Even if they don’t understand what they are and how they work. (Most don’t.)   That’s why, in my latest podcast (link below), I wanted to explore the “in-between” truth about tariffs.   And like Cybertrucks, I guess my thoughts on tariffs are polarizing.   Greg Gutfield mentioned me on Fox News. Harvard professors hate me now. (I wonder if they also key Cybertrucks?)   But before I show you what I think about tariffs… I have to mention something.   We’re Headed to Austin, Texas This weekend, my team and I are headed to Austin. By now, you should probably know why.   Yes, SXSW is happening. But my team and I are doing something I think is even better.   We’re putting on a FREE event on “Tech’s Turning Point.”   AI, quantum, biotech, crypto, and more—it’s all on the table.   Just now, we posted a special webpage with the agenda.   Click here to check it out and add it to your calendar.   The Truth About Tariffs People love to panic about tariffs causing inflation.   They wave around the ghost of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff from the Great Depression like it’s Exhibit A proving tariffs equal economic collapse.   But let me pop this myth:   Tariffs don’t cause inflation. And no, I'm not crazy (despite what angry professors from Harvard or Stanford might tweet at me).   Here's the deal.   Inflation isn’t when just a couple of things become pricier. It’s when your entire shopping basket—eggs, shirts, Netflix subscriptions, bananas, everything—starts costing more because your money’s worth less.   Inflation means your dollars aren’t stretching as far as they used to.   Take the 1800s.   For nearly a century, 97% of America’s revenue came from tariffs. Income tax? Didn’t exist. And guess what inflation was? Basically zero. Maybe 1% a year.   The economy was booming, and tariffs funded nearly everything. So, why do people suddenly think tariffs cause inflation today?   Tariffs are taxes on imports, yes, but prices are set by supply and demand—not tariffs.   Let me give you a simple example.   Imagine fancy potato chips from Canada cost $10, and a 20% tariff pushes that to $12. Everyone panics—prices rose! Inflation!   Nope.   If I only have $100 to spend and the price of my favorite chips goes up, I either stop buying chips or I buy, say, fewer newspapers.   If everyone stops buying newspapers because they’re overspending on chips, newspapers lower their prices or go out of business.   Overall spending stays the same, and inflation doesn’t budge.   Three quick scenarios:   We buy pricier chips, but fewer other things: Inflation unchanged. Manufacturers shift to the U.S. to avoid tariffs: Inflation unchanged (and more jobs here). We stop buying fancy chips: Prices drop again. Inflation? Still unchanged. The only thing that actually causes inflation is printing money.   Between 2020 and 2022 alone, 40% of all money ever created in history appeared overnight.   That’s why inflation shot up afterward—not because of tariffs.   Back to tariffs today.   Still No Inflation Unlike the infamous Smoot-Hawley blanket tariff (imagine Oprah handing out tariffs: "You get a tariff, and you get a tariff!"), today's tariffs are strategic.   Trump slapped tariffs on chips from Taiwan because we shouldn’t rely on a single foreign supplier for vital tech components—especially if that supplier might get invaded.   Now Taiwan Semiconductor is investing $100 billion in American manufacturing.   Strategic win, no inflation.   Then there’s Canada and Mexico—our friendly neighbors with weirdly huge tariffs on things like milk and butter (299% tariff on butter—really, Canada?).   Trump’s not blanketing everything with tariffs; he’s pressuring trade partners to lower theirs.   If they do, everybody wins. If they don’t, well, then we have a strategic trade chess game—but still no inflation.   In short, tariffs are about strategy, security, and fairness—not inflation.   Yes, blanket tariffs from the Great Depression era were dumb. Obviously. Today's targeted tariffs? Smart.   Listen to the whole podcast to hear why I think this.   And by the way, if you see a Cybertruck, don’t key it. Robin doesn’t care about your politics; she just likes her weird truck.   Maybe read a good book, relax, and leave cars alone.   (And yes, nobody keys Volkswagens, even though they were basically created by Hitler. Strange world we live in.) Source: https://altucherconfidential.com/posts/the-truth-about-tariffs-busting-the-inflation-myth    Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/       
    • No, not if you are comparing apples to apples. What we call “poor” is obviously a pretty high bar but if you’re talking about like a total homeless shambling skexie in like San Fran then, no. The U.S.A. in not particularly kind to you. It is not an abuse so much as it is a sad relatively minor consequence of our optimism and industriousness.   What you consider rich changes with circumstances obviously. If you are genuinely poor in the U.S.A., you experience a quirky hodgepodge of unhelpful and/or abstract extreme lavishnesses while also being alienated from your social support network. It’s about the same as being a refugee. For a fraction of the ‘kindness’ available to you in non bio-available form, you could have simply stayed closer to your people and been MUCH better off.   It’s just a quirk of how we run the place and our values; we are more worried about interfering with people’s liberty and natural inclination to do for themselves than we are about no bums left behind. It is a slightly hurtful position and we know it; we are just scared to death of socialism cancer and we’re willing to put our money where our mouth is.   So, if you’re a bum; you got 5G, the ER will spend like $1,000,000 on you over a hangnail but then kick you out as soon as you’re “stabilized”, the logistics are surpremely efficient, you have total unchecked freedom of speech, real-estate, motels, and jobs are all natural healthy markets in perfect competition, you got compulsory three ‘R’’s, your military owns the sky, sea, space, night, information-space, and has the best hairdos, you can fill out paper and get all the stuff up to and including a Ph.D. Pretty much everything a very generous, eager, flawless go-getter with five minutes to spare would think you might need.   It’s worse. Our whole society is competitive and we do NOT value or make any kumbaya exception. The last kumbaya types we had werr the Shakers and they literally went extinct. Pueblo peoples are still around but they kind of don’t count since they were here before us. So basically, if you’re poor in the U.S.A., you are automatically a loser and a deadbeat too. You will be treated as such by anybody not specifically either paid to deal with you or shysters selling bejesus, Amway, and drugs. Plus, it ain’t safe out there. Not everybody uses muhfreedoms to lift their truck, people be thugging and bums are very vulnerable here. The history of a large mobile workforce means nobody has a village to go home to. Source: https://askdaddy.quora.com/Are-the-poor-people-in-the-United-States-the-richest-poor-people-in-the-world-6   Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/ 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.