You need to understand that whether Al or anyone else does or does not make money in the market has nothing to do with you. YOU need to own your successes and your failures. If Al or anyone else has ideas that you identify with, work them into a plan and test it, if not move on and try something else. You will never succeed by complaining on some idiotic board....get to work!
Speedo please refer to previous post, I submitted it before entering all thoughts on Brooks which have now been added. #1 issue is Brooks traded in markets totally different from what he now teaches lemmings.
A lot of people change markets and time frames, so what? We both used to trade the ER on short time frame charts. it was profitable but mentally and emotionally exhausting. I've know the guy for a long time and believe he is a good trader but neither he nor anyone else has shown me their P&L nor do I have any interest in seeing.
The point I am making is that he changed trading tactics and soon after became a trading teacher as the market entered a paradigm shift. That's not commonplace.
Brooks neglected to properly address the paradigm shift the markets entered and Brooks failed in the books to mention that he changed strategies as this shift began. Brooks' lack of transparency is appalling! I assumed he had been developing a 5-minute price action analysis for over a decade when I first read the books.
The point I am making is you can't count on Brooks or anyone else for your success. Take from here and there but only you can make it happen.
Markets change many times per year and those new market conditions can last several days, several weeks or several months. If someone does not adapt (change) something in their trading plan or trading strategy whenever markets change...that's a trader that will see a negative impact on his/her trade results. In fact, I think this is why drawdowns occur (losing trading durations) because a trader has failed to adapt. In fact, the markets love those traders that do not adapt and remain fixated on something because its much easier for the market to take money from those types of traders...these types of traders are a stubborn bunch. Best to leave them alone as they "choose" to walk that lonely path to saying "it doesn't work" because some traders are just not suitable for trading before they take that first trade. Thus, there is nothing you can say or do to help them...they are unable to adapt (change)...most just do not want to adapt and some just don't know how to adapt but have alienated themselves so much...they'll never be able to recover and get going in the right direction. We know who they are because 2 years to 10 years from now...they are still fixated on the same thing and complaining about the same thing. Trading as a career...you better know how to recognize when markets have changed and you better know its time to adapt (change).
You and Motif have the same profile: You both have no clue how to trade You both ask others to tell you how to trade You both complain if somebody does not give you the correct information, information that should be given for free You both think you are trading experts You both are just arrogant newbies trying to compensate your own lack of knowledge by stealing that missing knowledge from others Massive IQ is not needed to become a good trader, but you both even miss the essential amount needed Maybe you should sue Al Brooks because he is not telling you all you want to know. Trading experts? You are more a comic duo like Laurel and Hardy.
"By day trading, is it really impossible to get a 3% return.." Not impossible. Problem is the words you added at the end of the sentence, "every day without fail". Yes, impossible.
Xelia, do you have any response to these criticisms of Brooks? There's one video I saw years ago of Brooks disrespecting CNBC pundits, saying if they were real traders they wouldn't be on TV talking about the markets but would make, I think he said 500% in a year day trading...he's implying he can do 500% yearly returns...no one can do that vs HFT/algorithms, which Brooks ignores..this guy shouldn't be defended without evidence.