The support forum is built with (1) General and FAQ forums for common trading queries received from aspiring and experienced traders, and (2) forums for course video topics. How to Trade Price Action and How to Trade Forex Price Action videos are consolidated into common forums.
Brooks Trading Course social media communities
OMG that's it! That's the confusion! His materials and trading style are different over time. You are so right!
...As are mine. That was my path too without realizing it. Kinda mind blown right now. Although I had to learn on my own after the basics.
That was a real eye opening paragraph Brad.
Yes, that was also a big realization for me. Al trades differently in his trading room because he mastered PA. He prefers high probability setups, so he is a natural scalper. If the context is good you often hear him say that he just took half position off as a scalp and he tries to swing the other half, but often he closes that other half too when the market doesn't follow quickly...
I'd recommend to watch the course twice and then DO NOT TRADE, but watch the trading room recordings, like the 6 month bundle of material (the 2015 are good and cost like $115). After some time, it really becomes natural, because you understand Al's mindset and style.
His trading style is different because what he teaches in his course is not a trading style but the understanding of how the market works. Each trader must adapt the material to their own trading style.
A good start is to follow always-in by taking obvious setups like, buy/sell the close, H1 (in strong BO) or H2 in tight channels and limit order entries below/above bad opposite signal bars (like buying below a doji in a bull BO phase after follow-through). Forget about scaling in and counter trend trading with limit orders, that is for the advanced trader, very hard to do. If you prefer swing setups, a good start are wedges, especially in a MTR context.
Yes, that was also a big realization for me. Al trades differently in his trading room because he mastered PA. He prefers high probability setups, so he is a natural scalper. If the context is good you often hear him say that he just took half position off as a scalp and he tries to swing the other half, but often he closes that other half too when the market doesn't follow quickly...
I like that style and if I could trade with a two part position I would. I have tested many times in the past. Not there yet. Maybe never. All-in all-out for me.
I'd recommend to watch the course twice and then DO NOT TRADE, but watch the trading room recordings, like the 6 month bundle of material (the 2015 are good and cost like $115). After some time, it really becomes natural, because you understand Al's mindset and style.
I watched the regular course straight through twice, watched the forex right through as well all video by video. Read almost every blog for years. Watched all bonus videos numerous times. Was in the room for a few months. Have a bunch of those recordings you are talking about and have reviewed them many times. Ect... ect...
His trading style is different because what he teaches in his course is not a trading style but the understanding of how the market works. Each trader must adapt the material to their own trading style.
You would think that's the case but I get "set straight" the minute I say I bought on a limit order after a big up bar at resistance. Or whatever the case may be. Or more typically it is in the form of what you wrote below.
A good start is to follow always-in by taking obvious setups like, buy/sell the close, H1 (in strong BO) or H2 in tight channels and limit order entries below/above bad opposite signal bars (like buying below a doji in a bull BO phase after follow-through). Forget about scaling in and counter trend trading with limit orders, that is for the advanced trader, very hard to do. If you prefer swing setups, a good start are wedges, especially in a MTR context.
Sorry but this is typical and exactly what I'm talking about.
That whole paragraph is great sounding but not very useful advice. Maybe even dangerous.
...."A good start is to follow always-in by taking obvious setups (not sure what those are) ...like, buy/sell the close, H1 (in strong BO) or H2 in tight channels and limit order entries below/above bad opposite signal bars (like buying below a doji in a bull BO phase after follow-through). (Those are all just entries and don't guarantee anything.) Forget about scaling in and counter trend trading with limit orders, that is for the advanced trader, very hard to do. (It's also the only way to make money in certain matrkets.) If you prefer swing setups, a good start are wedges, especially in a MTR context. (I like to fade MTR's as much as buy/sell the breakouts).
I'm definitely realizing trying to trade like Al or ANYBODY is a fools errand for me.
The more comfortable I am in my trading style the more I realize how different it is from Als.
It's coming to grips with the fact that's just fine and that's the hard part right now.
Thank you for your kind advice though!
...."A good start is to follow always-in by taking obvious setups (not sure what those are) ...like, buy/sell the close, H1 (in strong BO) or H2 in tight channels and limit order entries below/above bad opposite signal bars (like buying below a doji in a bull BO phase after follow-through). (Those are all just entries and don't guarantee anything.)
obvious mean when the probability is at least 60%, like when the always-in direction just switched. Entries matter because if you follow the high probability direction you can enter with swing stops and a good probability of making a profit. I just ask, like Al does, with each new bar printed are there more likely sellers or buyers above/below and is the always-in direction clear?
I keep it simple: if we are always in short, for example after a BO + FT, and a L2 forms near the EMA, and the reversal is not enough for a MTR then I just enter with swing stops to target a new low or if price makes an H2 near bottom I get out. Entries matter in this case, for example if the reversal is strong, and no L2 forms, I would never enter because it could become a sell climax and then you risk getting trapped. L2 is really just a sign of bad FT for the bulls in a bear trend.
...."A good start is to follow always-in by taking obvious setups(not sure what those are) ...like, buy/sell the close, H1 (in strong BO) or H2 in tight channels and limit order entries below/above bad opposite signal bars (like buying below a doji in a bull BO phase after follow-through). (Those are all just entries and don't guarantee anything.)
obvious mean when the probability is at least 60%, like when the always-in direction just switched. Entries matter because if you follow the high probability direction you can enter with swing stops and a good probability of making a profit. I just ask, like Al does, with each new bar printed are there more likely sellers or buyers above/below and is the always-in direction clear?
I see... "obvious" theres a clear setup.
I keep it simple: if we are always in short, for example after a BO + FT, and a L2 forms near the EMA, and the reversal is not enough for a MTR then I just enter with swing stops to target a new low or if price makes an H2 near bottom I get out. Entries matter in this case, for example if the reversal is strong, and no L2 forms, I would never enter because it could become a sell climax and then you risk getting trapped. L2 is really just a sign of bad FT for the bulls in a bear trend.
Got it. You make excellent points on the entries. I don't discount taking a great entry. But again a great entry is just the beginning as you are locked into that price after you enter. Everything AFTER that is tied to that particular price.
Going forward yes PA matters but really the only thing that matters is where your little dot exits in relation your little entry dot.
Entry and exit are one dimension in a four dimensional reality. Time being the fourth.
1) Dot... 2) Line... 3) 3D... 4) 3D + time.
Your entry is just a dot. Your exit is just a dot. Your entry would not move to your exit without a line and without time.
This sounds ridiculous and trivial but it's NOT.
Risk and time are interlinked as well.
If your trade takes risk in a certain amount of time VS a stoploss you can get out with a win and risked alot for the relatively small win but not realized a loss.
Is that better. Is that worse?
Is actual risk the same as vrtual risk?
Looking at the charts at the end of the day I see what everyone else does. It all seems obvious that if you waited for the double bottom, second entry, MTR, and a buy above a bull bar, possibly wait for a follow through bar and get on and ride till the top where you'd get out at that last red box ignoring all the rest you'd be set for life.
Of course it's NOT that easy otherwise everyone would be trading them and making money.
What you don't see is how many of those turned into continuation patterns causing you to loose on more than the %40 you'd have to hold perfectly.
Don't get me wrong. I prefer to have a lower win rate (unlike Al) and a larger win/loss ratio. I try to stay above a %50 win rate but I'm more concerned about W/L ratio and keeping that higher than W/Rate
I agree with your assessment though. Makes total sense to find a low R/R situation to base your trade off of even if it just gives you structure.
