No registration required! (Why?)

Wanted:Trading Mentor

Aspiring trader seeks to hire a mentor with MP expertise.

Requirements: At least 2 years experience with demonstrated success day trading the ES with MP methodologies and systems. Excellent verbal and presentation skills. Willingness to travel for person to person tutoring.

Please send email detailing your experience and fee requirements.

Excellent! I think if you are patient and keep looking one will come through who has the time. I'll ask among some people that I know if they are willing to take on anyone during the quiet time of summer. Statements Rule! You are on the right track.
Probably I should mind my own business on this one so I don't get attacked, but I'll throw my own two cents in anyway. I am not implying that what I am about to say is the reason behind why few people provide statements, but it is an issue that never seems to be addressed by all those that demand statements and say if statements aren't available the person can't trade.

If you want to verify what I am about to say, consult any attorney who specializes in this area. If you produce statements as part of a program for mentoring you are making an implicit claim that the person taking the course or mentorship will achieve similar results. It is not possible to claim that although you have demonstrated these results, the student may not, or even likely won't, achieve similar results. If you felt that, what is the point of the statements? To say you can do it, but if you take the course/mentorship, you won't? It's to imply the instructor/mentor has done it and if the program is taken, the student will to. That is how the courts look at this right now.

Again, I am not saying that is why all these vendors I see blasted in here don't provide statements. I am just saying that anyone who has a skilled attorney familiar with current trends in lawsuits would advise you not to post statements. Yet no one will even give this any credence. I suspect the mentors that actually can trade would not provide the statements for this reason. That means, to me, one needs another method for determining if the person can actually trade, if that is the goal. I would suggest asking them to trade live, in person, in front of you before committing to a mentorship. That would solve the problem. If they say no, then you can pass if you want.

I also wonder why trading seems to be the only area where a mentor must actually be able to do the activity, as opposed to teach it. In all sports that I can think of the mentor/coach can not outperform the athlete (or even do the sport), yet the athlete does everything they say, and improves. Imagine if the athlete said "First pick up that ball, kick my butt on the court, then I'll accept you as my instructor." Myself, I'd prefer someone who was a proven teacher to someone who was proven to be able to do the action themselves, and unproven as an instructor.

I know this is all 100% opposed to what everyone in here believes, but I can say for sure I know some very successful traders who are simply horrible at teaching, and I know a few (they are only a few) people who just don't have the nerves for trading, but they do know trading, and are great teachers. I think being skilled at both is the best case, but that cuts the field down to so few that one may never have the chance to work with anyone.

My point for posting this, like just about everything I post outside my private forum, is to try to balance things, and show the other side of the coin. I am not on either side here, I just frequently see only one side to things posted, and I thought I might show some other ideas.
Good perspective Jim - thanks. I know we've had this discussion before and it probably still falls under the legal problem that you described above but I often think that a trader, if they wanted to prove profitability, could refer the enquirer to their broker. All the broker needs to say is "yes", this trader was profitable for 10 months out of 12 during 2006, for example. But this probably has the same legal implications that you described.

I think that your analogy with sports is not as good as an analogy with an academic pursuit would be. For example, a chess or poker player. I think that the analogy with poker player could be a good one. There might be a poker player that frequently gets knocked out of tournaments because they can't keep their cool and bet their gut instead of the odds. Afterwards (even while playing) they can tell you what they should have done but because they can't control their emotions they never end up being tournament finalists. This, I think would be a closer analogy to trading which has many mediocre and unprofitable (but knowledge) traders who trade their emotions instead of the setups and rules.

Heading slightly off topic here but on the theme of the last sentence I did some research on when you should allow your gut to influence your trading and determined that it was only after many years of solid trading and even then it wasn't really your gut but your learned subconscious that was making the decisions. Some people may say that gut and subconscious are the same thing but now I'm drifting even further off-topic into semantics.
Yes, I think the poker or chess analogy is good. Nowadays poker tournaments have so many entrants that they go day and night for over a week, and I've heard many of the top older players say they can't go that long, and it's now a young man's game. So, if they can't place any more should they be disregarded as coaches? Hardly. I guess that was my point.

I just don't suspect that many traders who are working full time have a lot of time to teach. And if they took a break from trading and did some teaching, their last year, let's say, would not be profitable, since they weren't trading. So, do you go back and look at the previous year? Then I could hear people saying, well, he really was trading, but doing poorly, so he said he took off for awhile, and that's the real reason why he is showing last year's trading. And on and on.

I think my point is, this is not a simple matter, and I think the approach is getting oversimplified. If someone wants to deceive people, they will do all sorts of things to do that. Like fake statements. Like you said, we already covered this. Recently I read about a hedge fund that had some trouble, and it turned out the audited statements from a top firm were phony. The firm didn't do it, the audited statements were made up to copy the ones used by that company, the article said.

So, you get audited statements, and then you call the company? Then they find a way to do that, and have the company vouch, but it's still made up. I know the top thing I do when trying to find a good doctor or dentist is personal referral from someone I know and trust with firsthand experience. I would want someone that I know someone personally who worked with them and was satisfied with the investment. I know that's hard in this business, but I wish there was more we could do along those lines.
Your last idea is the best one Jim. Oliver may accept the word of someone he trusts like a friend or business associate. This could replace his need for statements which might be hard to come by. Oliver, do you have an accountant and/or tax advisor? Perhaps you can ask them if any of their clients are traders and let them know what you're looking for. Alternatively, are there any accounting firms or tax consultants that specialize in the accounts for day traders? If so, they may be able to take your request and pass it on to one or two of their clients who they feel might be willing to do this...

You might also approach someone like Linda Bradford Raschke or Ed Seykota directly and ask them if they have someone that they could recommend. I don't believe that they use Market Profile so they'd have to refer you on. Just some ideas.
Not bad, Guy. Not bad at all.
I think the issue of legal liability for showing statements is a real one, but also one that can easily be dealt with by the pen of a good lawyer. For instance, I would be willing to sign an agreement that states I have seen the statements and understand that my trading results may differ substantially, the mentor is not making any representations that he can actually teach me to trade profitably, etc. AND I would indemnify the mentor and hold him harmless against any trading losses I incurred. As far as fraud or fakery goes, I would insist the broker issue a simple opinon letter that the statements to the best of his knowledge are authentic and true. That gets rid of the legal/fraud overhang unless the broker is involved in the scam to fleece me. (I said I would pay handsomely for a mentor, but not enough for someone to engage in an elaborate scheme.)

As far as learning from students of other gurus, mentors, teachers, what have you, I am interested solely in MP based trading. I think your suggestion of consulting my tax professional is a good one.

day trading, I recall reading your rebuttal to ahk who brought up the same issue as Mr. Kane and at that time you emphatically disagreed with him about the legal implications of providing statements. You seem to have moderated your position since then. I'm curious why the change of heart.
If it's the same conversation that I'm thinking of then it was when ahk was lying and trying to con newbies with fake trades. Which topic/page was it?
I don't remember the page(s) but I recall the topic was about the value of statements and why teaching advisories don't provide them. ahk argued the legal liability was real and you strongly disagreed with him. Does that juggle your memory?
How long ago did you read this?
Originally posted by eeisen

Frank Butera is hardly one of the "premier traders in the world".

It depends on what "handsome amount of money" means, that's entirely subjective depending on who you're talking to. If you're talking at least 5k/day, then I'd consider doing it, depending on what it is you want and where you're at already. Any less than that, and averaged out over 30 days I'd be losing money because I wouldn't be trading live cash while trying to explain things to you either in person or over the phone.

If you're interested, shoot me an email at I don't mind making live calls with you on the S&P futures intraday with you over the phone or whatever until you're convinced I'm the real deal, no money up front. I have nothing to hide.

Does that 5 grand include room and board?