Babool 

Al is selling something that now costs $249 for 36 hours of recorded content. If you get one trading idea, one set-up that you can backtest and add to your trading plan..it's worth it. If you get nothing or it does not work at all you get a greater insight on how not to trade.

I read parts of the 3 later Brooks books (his writing style is so hard to read and so deadly boring that I couldn't make it all the way through any of them ), and also a good part of the course (same comment about his speaking style ).

@tturner86 studied his materials thoroughly and tested and applied them in great detail. I think I would have blown my brains out before doing that.... A classic case of "different strokes for different folks."

Still, I learned a few things, and they have stuck with me. I couldn't tell you what a "second entry" is any more, and I don't care, because that wasn't among the things that stuck. The stuff that did stick helped me with my own style, and I think it stuck because it spoke to me, and also showed me things I hadn't seen. The stuff that didn't stick didn't fit well enough with me, or perhaps I was just missing the point, but in either case didn't help me move along. So basically I have forgotten it.

I do not trade the way Al does, and never will. But that's fine by me, because I did learn some genuinely useful things that I put to use every day. This is about 10 billion times better than a broker statement for me, maybe 20 billion. A brokerage statement, assuming it is genuine, would tell me something about how Mr. Brooks traded during a particular period. At best, that might tell me that he traded well -- at that time. It won't tell me that I will trade well if I try to use his stuff.

I understand wanting something to validate that the person you are spending money on is not ripping you off. I honestly do not see how you can look to any kind of documentation to show you that. As many have pointed out, you probably are not going to get it. Also, as I and others have pointed out, you can't rely on it anyway. You would have to first know that they were legit before you could know that you can trust it -- Catch 22.

My take on Brooks is that he is OK as a source of ideas and information on trading, for me. How do I know? Because he has been, for me. I imagine many others have just gone to sleep trying to plow through his books, or have tried out this or that idea and not found it to work, for them. In that case, they should not spend any more money on him.

I really don't know that there is a better test than that. And I don't know how you can expect to know ahead of time if any source will work out for you. So, my suggestion is not to put much time and money into any of them.

I understand @JonnyBoy's issues, and anyone else's too, but if you get one good idea from someone, that's pretty good, and better than you will get from most. I would settle for that, happily.

So, my simple advice is not to expect much, and definitely to not pay much, and to not look for something -- including a review web site, or a statement, or whatever -- that will tell you the good ones from the bad. Just assume anyone who asks you for very much money isn't for you, and carefully sample the ones who don't....

It's you who makes something work or not anyway, not any vendor or expert, and that includes every single one of them, no matter how good or bad they are. The whole effort to find the one who will show you "how to do it" is mistaken, and will lead you nowhere good.

Bob.

bobwest 

I read parts of the 3 later Brooks books (his writing style is so hard to read and so deadly boring that I couldn't make it all the way through any of them ), and also a good part of the course (same comment about his speaking style ).

I read somewhere that if you play the videos at 1.5x or 2x speed it really helps to keep you awake. It sure helped me when I was going through them.

Whenever a question is asked, you can never predict how the other persons (in this case the members of FIO) are going to react. You also don’t know in which direction the topic of conversation will go.

It appears that many different side discussions organically spawned from my original question of “Does Al Brooks actually trade live for a living.” Reponses ranged from “stop chasing vendors” to other sidebar discussions talking about the validity of Al’s work in general. Some positive, some negative and some wobbling down the middle.

And then we got to the topic of the ‘evidence’ required to prove a vendor is a trader AND an educator, vs. just an educator. I think the majority agreed that if a vendor doesn’t trade and only educates, then that is fine! Just as long as the vendor is honest about it.

These were all different “answers” to a question I didn’t actually ask. I guess this is just human nature and perhaps it was a necessity to have these side discussions as a foothold to make up one’s own mind.

Amongst some of the branching conversations, there were some responses that I thought were quite ignorant.

In my opinion it has been okay on FIO to question and hold SchoolOfTrade, Puretick, JaguarTrading, EminiTradingSchool, [insert as appropriate here] etc. to account with very poor feedback and downright negativity. Remember, like Al, they all claimed they were professional traders trading a live market before it was discovered they were not.

However, when somebody dared to ask the question if Al was in fact a live trader, it appeared this was too close to some peoples’ nerve.

Nobody took a bullet (other than the shills) of the vendors I listed above, but they did for Al. And I note – the original question had NOTHING to do with the validity Al’s work and what it has or has not done for peoples’ own personal trading. This original question was about whether he trades live or not.

We should be allowed as individuals to request what we feel is a level of appropriate comfort with respect to a vendors credibility. Especially if a future purchase from that vendor could be on the cards. If that doesn’t fit with other FIO members MO, tough cookies. Al Brooks is promoted by FIO, therefore he should open to some disclosure.

With that said, I have spent far too much time on this thread taking a stance that doesn’t sit well with certain individuals. Quite frankly I don’t care. I don’t need the brownie points paid in thanks. I am on my own path and it is tough as hell, but that doesn’t stop me from sticking my neck out for what I believe are the right questions to ask.

To counter an argument against an FIO promoted vendor not requiring to prove any sort of credibility is quite asinine in my opinion.

If a vendor is being actively promoted on FIO, even if it’s ‘just for education’ - ultimately they are called a vendor because they have something to sell. Like it or not, they run a business. Their trading credibility should be verifiable and/or at the very least the question asked and responded to. FIO is probably the only honest forum left. I want to keep it that way.

Up until now, it appears Al doesn’t feel any justification from his end is required. THAT IS FINE. But the slience has sown enough seed of doubt for me. I believe Al Brooks falls in to the dishonest camp. My opinion only. You can think what you like.

In summing up, aside from the sensationalism of Trading Schools continued attacks on Al, of which I don't partake and quite frankly I don't care anymore. My energy to continue reading this thread is spent.

We shouldn’t be so quick to flame down somebody asking about the credibility of a vendor actively promoted on this site. It is a perfectly ethical question to ask.

Sounds like we have two questions/issues. The first being does Al Brooks trade for a living ? And second, if so, is he willing to prove it with some verifiable evidence ? I read in this thread his response to the second question is no because it would violate a law. Since this is not true, he either misunderstands the law or is using that answer as a (weak) smokescreen to avoid answering the question directly.

Maybe someone here knows this, but is there a link or reference to where Al Brooks claims he is trading for a living ?

Seems like an easy enough question to ask him directly at his upcoming FIO Webinar on December 8.

I think this whole issue has just gotten overblown because we are living in fractious times. Forum behaviour in particular and the interwebs in general are just a microcosm. Witness this thread and the recent Scalpers Reject and Stone Mush examples.

Outside of blatant name calling and throwing insults, I don't think anyone should regard robust differences of opinion as flaming. FIO is top dog in this arena but emotive stuff will always get out of hand at some point.

Most who want absolute proof will have been burned already, and that probably covers most of us - so it will always be an emotive issue. Even so, I still don't think anyone should underestimate the difficulty of obtaining meaningful 'proof'.

Did anyone reading this get to see Donald's tax returns or Hillary's emails before they voted? Nope, didn't think so. We make our minds up and pull the trigger, nothing else counts.

Cheers

I hope that, in expressing my views, I gave no one offense.

If I did, I did not mean to, and I apologize.

Bob.

bobwest 

I hope that, in expressing my views, I gave no one offense. If I did, I did not mean to, and I apologize. Bob.

Not at you @bobwest. I don't think you offending anyone would ever be possible. Your opinions are ALWAYS welcome and ALWAYS balanced.

Sent using the NexusFi mobile app

bobwest 

I hope that, in expressing my views, I gave no one offense. If I did, I did not mean to, and I apologize. Bob.

I must admit I laughed out loud reading this.

Jeez Bob, are you sure you're not Canadian?

JonnyBoy 

.We should be allowed as individuals to request what we feel is a level of appropriate comfort with respect to a vendors credibility. Especially if a future purchase from that vendor could be on the cards. If that doesn’t fit with other FIO members MO, tough cookies. Al Brooks is promoted by FIO, therefore he should open to some disclosure.

You asked a fair and legitimate question. I don't expect a golf pro to be able to win or even play in the US Open but I expect that he/she can play the game with some degree of skill. Likewise, in the trading business, I think it is also a reasonable expectation that a vendor selling advanced trading education or systems should use their product to trade real money. The silence from Al Brooks tells us that he doesn't eat what he cooks so you have to ask yourself why that is.

Even lacking real broker statements, one can judge a vendor by 2 things:

1. Have at least a sim 3rd party trading record, for example on Collective2. Sure, this is not as good as a broker statement, but at least it indicates that the vendor theoretically can profitably trade. There is absolutely no excuse for not having at least this.

2. Behaviour in the live trading room. If the vendor can not give concise, before the fact trading signals and explaining why he did those trades, then it is all hogwash. Al has been criticized for not running such a room. He comes and goes, throws in ideas, etc. That isn't how you establish reputation as profitable trader...

Now the value of his books is another question and he could have good ideas even without being a hugely successful trader, but let's not advertise him as such if there is no evidence for it...