Jack Hershey

[ravenglass]

If this is him, he used to post as 'jack hershey', he is in his 70's and is now banned from Elite:-

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/member.php?s=&action=getinfo&userid=15445

Why did they ban him?

 

[TheBramble]

My point, and I do hope I'm not being forced to labour it, is that YOUR position was "Successful Traders do not talk about it" and there is Jack and his like - talking about it. A paradox - or perhaps not.

The logical conclusion, if your premise/hypothesis is correct, being that no successful traders ever post on bulletin boards.

Clearly the fact that we two do, is a clear disputation of that?

 

[SOCRATES]

Yes, good question, why did they ban the old boy ?

 

[Bigbusiness]

Yes, good question, why did they ban the old boy ?

I don't know but I did see he was using at least 3 nicks and they were editing out his profanities. That might have had something to do with it.

 

[TheBramble]

Yes, good question, why did they ban the old boy ?

Same reason they end up banning most of the 'names'. Get too big for their boots.

 

[SOCRATES]

I never knew he was using 3 nicks, what nicks were these, do you know ?

 

[Bigbusiness]

I never knew he was using 3 nicks, what nicks were these, do you know ?

I read that but can't find the link now. I think bubba7 and jack hershey are two of them but I can't remember the 3rd.

 

[SOCRATES]

My point, and I do hope I'm not being forced to labour it, is that YOUR position was "Successful Traders do not talk about it" and there is Jack and his like - talking about it. A paradox - or perhaps not.

The logical conclusion, if your premise/hypothesis is correct, being that no successful traders ever post on bulletin boards.

Clearly the fact that we two do, is a clear disputation of that?

It is very simple really, I am surprised that you have not yet realised it or indeed understood it, my dear fellow.

There is a world of difference between what can be made available for public consumption on what is after all a public forum, and what under any circumstances ought not to be, indeed can not be.

Sadly, there has to be an inverse relationship between what the imprudent expect in contradistinction with what they have a right to recieve, that is their perception of what is their inaliable right to recieve by virtue of membership or otherwise.

Perhaps, but I hope not, you may subject to the same misconceptions as countless others.

I am going to do my best to clear it up for you right now.

There is persistent discussion on these boards and those of other websites devoted to this topic with regard to "systems". I keep pointing out that a system is an inert entity. It is inert until something is done to make it work, that is to make it operate properly.

A way to make something work is a method, not a system.

I will remind you that this is an axiom. An axiom is a fundamental truth.

What is also a fundamental truth is that it is perfectly acceptable to superficially discuss topics of common interest between members, or even to provide examples, provided they are explained exclusively in mechanical form only.

What is not acceptable is to discuss special interest topics of a delicate and confidential nature, in depth, in a public forum, with perfect strangers, as this is detrimental to maintaining a particular and specific edge.

Of course, the membership is unlikely to be satisfied with results, however accurate, if they are not accompanied by a detailed explanations of the methods underpinning the action or the result of the action.

One has to be very prudent in this regard, irrespective of how much the point is laboured or the matter prodded.

This also is the main reason why the majority do not understand what Jack Hershey displays. It is because he delivers the result ~ but does not clearly explain the method.
This causes people who are not "in the know" so to speak, to become frustrated.

In the end analysis you cannot force anyone to publicly reveal methods personal to them.

Now perhaps you may be able to understand more clearly why being a successful trader on the one hand and posting on bulletin boards on the other are not and cannot be related for the reasons I give above.

I hope this will satisfy your interest.


Kind Regards As Usual.

 

[Spydertrader]

The 516 page thread on elite about his methods is an interesting read but those that have spent lots of time on his methods don't seem to have had much success. The thread closed, after an appeal for someone who makes a profit using his methods fell on deaf ears. Perhaps they are all dunces and there is a way to make it work but I don't think it is worth spending lots of time on methods that might not work when there are so many proven ones out there.

The 516 page thread to which you refer involves Jack's Futures Trading Methods. Nwbprop (the originator of the futures method thread on ET) recently closed the thread, however, he has enjoyed success using the Equities Trading Methods. Discussion regarding Jack Hershey's Equities Method (referred to in the original post) continues in another thread located here:

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=38777

- Spydertrader

Edit: Jack continues to post on ET currently under the handle Grob109. He has in the past used Jack Hershey and Bubba7

 

[dbphoenix]

The 516 page thread to which you refer involves Jack's Futures Trading Methods. Nwbprop (the originator of the futures method thread on ET) recently closed the thread, however, he has enjoyed success using the Equities Trading Methods.

Actually he just quit trading because he couldn't make any of it work. In fact, you posted to it. 🙁

 

[madmaxer]

Bigbusiness

I am sort of a newbee here.
You metnioned :/ I don't think it is worth spending lots of time on methods that might not work when there are so many proven ones out there?/

an you shed more light on these proven methods. Any hint will be appreciated.

Thanks

 

[Spydertrader]

Actually he just quit trading because he couldn't make any of it work. In fact, you posted to it. 🙁

Actually, you expressed a flawed interpretation of Nwbprop's success. Nwbprop provided clarification in This Post.

- Spydertrader

 

[fadentrade]

Here are the facts so far, the only time Jack Hershey has ever gone on record was in 2002 when he lost 26% in a trading contest, he didn't even have the integrity to finish it, he started losing, made excuses and ran.

Not a single member of SCT including Spydertrader has ever made a live call or posted their P/L

The language is deliberately and ridiculously esoteric to hide the fact that nothing is really said, in fact some of the words are laughingly innapropriate

And as for the endorsement by Soctrates I can only assume it is another attempt by him to convince us how intelligent he is.. but there is an old saying.. if you are any good at all people will be telling you, not the other way around

But the easiest measure of Jack and his method comes from his own lips when he claims:
"With SCT you can reap 3 times the daily range without ever having a loss"

Thats right, he says without ever having a loss.. only the gullible and ignorant need apply!

 

[zt3k]

this is stale news. Why are you hyped up about it ?

Here are the facts so far, the only time Jack Hershey has ever gone on record was in 2002 when he lost 26% in a trading contest, he didn't even have the integrity to finish it, he started losing, made excuses and ran.

Not a single member of SCT including Spydertrader has ever made a live call or posted their P/L

The language is deliberately and ridiculously esoteric to hide the fact that nothing is really said, in fact some of the words are laughingly innapropriate

And as for the endorsement by Soctrates I can only assume it is another attempt by him to convince us how intelligent he is.. but there is an old saying.. if you are any good at all people will be telling you, not the other way around

But the easiest measure of Jack and his method comes from his own lips when he claims:
"With SCT you can reap 3 times the daily range without ever having a loss"

Thats right, he says without ever having a loss.. only the gullible and ignorant need apply!