Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
I've been around quite a while and from everything I've seen I no longer give any trading vendor the benefit of the doubt. As far as I'm concerned they are all a scam unless they can prove otherwise. Some here just haven't been burned enough apparently.
I was just browsing around, looking to get caught up, and came upon this discussion of Brooks.
It looks like there is a controversy now because a web site that specializes in debunking trading claims has focused on Brooks, and asked him to prove his trading with statements. Apparently Brooks has declined. This is taken as evidence of faking.
Many have weighed in, pro and con. I'm going to try to not do that, although this will seem like a defense of Brooks by some, and I assure you that it is not. It has to do with how you can know that someone is legit or not.
Short answer: you can't.
You can try it out for yourself, putting up just the minimum amount of money possible, preferably not very much into any one person. Also, the more someone is asking you to pay, the less likely it is that you should pay them. Also, everyone has an agenda. Just seeming to be right is a powerful motivation, so it is wise to take everything you do not validate for yourself with a grain or two of salt, no matter what it is. That includes both claims by vendors of systems or authors of books, and reviews by those who doubt them.
With that said, here is my cent and a half, starting with this post:
Uh, no. Not to be critical of @dk27 or anyone else, but you would not believe all the excellent fakery that has been attempted even in this forum, which is carefully supervised to block that sort of thing. I recall a guy who posted, every single day, a very, very convincing video of his trades, taken apparently in real time, during the first half-hour or so. He was astonishingly successful. I think it went on for about a month, before the sheer magnitude of his success started to raise skepticism. As I recall, finally someone noticed that a supposed trade had not appeared on the live DOM, meaning it never really happened, and that was the beginning of the end of the whole thing. Then suddenly everyone noticed that there are ways to fake anything, and he either left in a huff or got banned, I don't remember which. He was, by the way, offering to teach anyone how to do it for a modest amount (a few thousand, as I recall.)
The point of this story is that anything can be faked, nothing can be believed as "evidence," other than you putting it in play yourself, and making sure it works, or not, for you.
If it does, you've got your proof. If it doesn't, maybe there was something good there, and maybe not, but it wasn't the right thing for you, at the time.
Richard Dennis, who made hundreds of millions trading commodities back when a hundred million was real money, famously said that he could lay out his methods in the Wall Street Journal, and no one would follow them. He was probably right, and not because of the cynicism it implies, but for a simpler reason: you will always take whatever you get from another person and rework it until it fits you. So something that worked for them may be a dead end for you. Or something that someone has tried and discarded may be just the ticket for you.
This is not true only in trading, by the way.
It does mean, don't follow vendors, don't expect anyone to give you the Way to Trade, and use just what you can validate for yourself.
A last point just on Brooks: I don't know and I don't care what he thought he could or couldn't do about publishing his results under the rules. Very likely, he just didn't want to. Maybe that is because he is a big fake. Maybe he just has a misconception about the regulations. Maybe he values his personal financial privacy (no one is ever going to be fool enough to ask me for my results , but they're not going to get them, either.) Maybe it was a way to tell the guy to stuff it.
If you saw his genuine, audited statement, and if you absolutely believed it, and if you bought his course because of it, you would be making a mistake. His results are not a good reason for you doing anything.
Again, I'm not taking a pro- or anti- Brooks position. I'm taking a position against the whole idea of finding out how to trade by following anyone else. And sure, you can learn from someone else, and sure, you do have to be careful about all the fakes out there. What to do? Try things yourself, and be careful about spending much money on them.
Sorry I went on so long, especially since it's only worth about a cent and a half anyway.... But I think all these controversies are essentially valueless, as is the search for the Answer from someone else.
I do believe the original basis is being somewhat misconstrued. Aside from sensationalism over at Trading Schools where many people are fixated on Al Brook’s trading record, I believe the majority of people just want to know that he trades a live account with real money.
As I have said, I would be disappointed if I found out that he doesn’t. I have read and re-read his books (as have many others on FIO) and I liked to think we were all in this together every single day in the live market. Heck, I have even said to myself on occasion, “I wonder what Al would be saying right about now”.
If the continual rhetoric on FIO is to stop chasing vendors (I am hearing this more and more, over and over), then no vendors should be allowed to present, no matter how popular outside or inside of FIO they are perceived to be. Ultimately the vendor always has something to sell and human nature says we will chase after it, especially if the presentation is slick and there is a feint hint of getting an edge and/or being more profitable.
So isn’t FIO perpetuating this behaviour by allowing vendors to present? Isn’t this giving the vendor a platform for future sales? I am seasoned enough now to be selective, but of course that was a very different story in the past.
As I mentioned previously, there is no being neutral on this subject with respect to how transparent a vendor should or needs to be. When I first became a member back in 2012 I was approached privately by Felton Trading about using their services that had a very impressive trading record. They were eventually banned from FIO (or BMT as it was then) and have since been exposed admitting they don’t and have never traded in a live market, despite them suggesting otherwise for years.
So this is one of the reasons why people feel so strongly about this subject. I respectfully agree and disagree with you all at the same time!
--------------------------------------------------------
- Trade what you see. Invest in what you believe -
--------------------------------------------------------
I'm not able to speak for FIO as a whole, nor about how @Big Mike decides who can come on and who can't. I assume he has made a value judgment about their plausibility.
Let's skip the trading vendors for a moment. The head of NinjaTrader was on here just a while ago. He was obviously selling something: NT8. Not everyone likes what he was selling. I know at least one guy (ahem) who has had some serious problems with what he was selling. I think it's fine that he came on. Also, it's fine that he is held accountable by the members for his product working as he promised. I think Brooks and all the rest should be held accountable, too. Did I say otherwise? If I did, I un-say it now. They should be held accountable, too.
I don't know that I was (or am) being all that neutral. I think I made my caution about and disapproval of vendor faking pretty clear. I also don't at all doubt that many/most are just out to get your money, another point I think I made.
I agree and disagree with you at the same time, too.
My only point is: don't go looking for someone else to tell you how to do it. Nothing else is meant. I don't know anything about this whole thing beyond that.
It seems to me the experience with "Felton Trading" saying they traded with real money would reinforce the belief that it doesn't matter if Al Brookssays he is trading with a live account. How would you know if it's the truth? I liken it to cheese. I'm lactose intolerant so when I see cheese in Whole Foods, I just walk past it. That doesn't mean others shouldn't be able to buy cheese, it just isn't right for me. I think the point a few of the other posters are making is this, he could be selling a beautiful lie or the truth. The real question is, can I use this to get my trading where I want it to be?
my 2 cents.
Our life is our own today. Tomorrow you will be dust, a shade, a tale that is told. Live mindful of death, the hour flies.
Knowing the truth of whether Al Brooks trades live or not will probably never be known unless he chooses to make it so.
My main gripe is that I would be disappointed to find that out that he didn’t, irrespective of what I or others perceive to be the value of his Work. The story I was sold was that he is a live trader just like you and me.
I thought it was a simple answer to a simple question.
This thread is far too consuming now. Time for a break.
--------------------------------------------------------
- Trade what you see. Invest in what you believe -
--------------------------------------------------------
I think @bobwest and @JonnyBoy make some good points, but I think JonnyBoy has brought up a very good argument about vendors on FIO.
Full disclosure as to where I stand. I have not even once thought about purchasing any education tools from a vendor, the thought has not even crossed my mind at all. I have absolutely 0 interest in paying for someone to teach me how they trade, and that's a personal belief as I trust myself to know what I need better than some random person on the internet selling 'one size fits all' education.
On the other hand, I believe in transparency and honesty, and I do think that if you claim to be X, and you are selling something based on that, you should have to back it up. Not because it matters to me, but because there are a lot of suckers in this field, and there should be some sort of protection for them.
Now that we have that out of the way, I think there's a difference between the CEO of NinjaTrader coming in here and selling you NinjaTrader, because his intentions are clear. It doesn't matter whether or not he trades, or is a successful trader, and I have no idea if he claims to be. He is selling you a platform, not education based on his experience.
However, if someone like Al Brooksas a trader is allowed to come in, I think he should be able to at least defend his claim that he trades what he sells with real money. Does he have to get an audit done and post all of this for the public to see? That I don't think he needs to do. For one, you can fake anything, and I understand privacy is important. So again I'll bring up FundSeeder. If you don't know about FundSeeder, do some quick research on FIO and you'll find out that they connect directly to your broker and verify your trades. From what I understand it is anonymous, and no personal information is shown. You won't be able to find 'Al Brooks'' profile without knowing his unique #. But Al could share that number with one of the moderators of FIO to prove that he trades.
If he doesn't trade, that's perfectly fine, it doesn't mean he shouldn't be allowed to come into FIO as a vendor. However, he should have to claim himself to be a pundit, and not a trader.
I think @Big Mike and his team have weeded out obvious scammers from presenting on FIO, and I am not saying things need to be revolutionized, but I would like to propose a small evolution.
I would ask him and the FIO team to possibly consider adding somewhere in the webinar, whether they are a pundit or a trader. If they claim to be a trader then they need to prove one way or another to the FIO team that they trade. If they are a pundit that's fine, but let's make it clear so that the suckers don't get suckered into buying something thinking that someone is a trader.
Yesterday's excellence is today's standard and tomorrow's mediocrity
@Big Mike can explain more on how webinars are selected.
But here is my take. There are two types of webinars educational and promotional. Educational webinars are just that, education. The vendors are selected based on their reputation and popularity with FIO members. This is one reason we see scalping webinars even though Mike disagrees with the topic. If a vendor advertises during a webinar they are usually not brought back. If the community doesn't like the webinar then they are not brought back.
The second is promotional and those are only allowed to site sponsors. To become a site sponsor is an ordeal. Mike does his due diligence and vets the sponsors well. Again he can speak more to how that is done. But just let me say this, Mike is very picky on who is allowed to sponsor the site. He could have done like other sites and just taken the money from anyone, but he hasn't.
So I am going to leave it with this, if you have issues with the presenters of Webinars please post in the webinar thread or PM Mike.
Now on to Al, I studied all of his books and the course. I took that mixed it with Market and Volume profile via FuturesTrader71, added in some custom RSI and VWAP stuff and create my own trading style. Al provided a base understanding of how the market works. It is a bit myopic, but it was a start. Having talked to him personally I think he is a great guy. I agree and hope his story is true. But ultimately I don't care, it will have no bearing on me, my trading, and my future.
I think people look for turnkey trading. I am not saying anyone posting here is, but that just in general it seems that people want it handed to them. After studying Al's stuff I took 1 major setup and manually back tested it. Looking at 5 min charts all the way back to 2008. Bar for bar, day for day. What looked like a Major Trend Reversal, where it worked and were it failed. Marking thousands of instances. I did this for other setups. I created my trading plan 2 sided, what to do if a setup works and what to do if the setup fails. The failing side gave me ideas on what kind of risk management was needed, but it also gave me ideas on where I might be able to reverse if I was wrong.
And earlier @trendisyourfriend I wasn't talking about trading what you believe. I was talking about trading a system that you believe it. There is a difference, if you have done the testing and have found an edge you will have more confidence in trading than if you trade a system that someone 'told' you had an edge. As others said about broker statements seeing is believing. Well actually testing a strategy and seeing it work is worth more than a broker statement from someone else.
There is no right way to trade, but there are plenty of wrong ways. To me the number one wrong way is to trade halfcocked and by the seat of your pants.