|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
The following is more in the continuing discussion between Brad Stewart
and Bradley Cowan. For those that have missed this ongoing discussion,
it began on Dec 13, 1999 when I asked forum readers for comments
regarding Cowan's books on trading and market theory. Since then, both
Cowan and Stewart were "drawn" into these forum discussions on a variety
of issues too numerous to mention here.
The following post from Stewart is somewhat lengthy...those not
interested in this discussion should stop reading here. Also, sometimes
lengthy posts are cut-off before the end of the post. If this happens, I
will repost the missing portion immediately after I learn of it. (No
need to send a post to tell me!)
Finally, I'd like to thank both Cowan and Stewart for sharing their
thoughts with us. Regardless of what position you take...if any...this
has been an interesting exchange of words to say the least. I will
continue to post on behalf of both Cowan and Stewart as long as either
has anything significant to say (Or...forum readers tell me they've had
enough!).
Good trading,
Andre Franklin
WickedTrader, LLC.
http://www.wickedtrader.com/
(This post ends with the words "Brad Stewart").
________________________________________________________
Dear Andre,
I apologize for my delay in response, I have been away for several days.
It seems to me that there are several separate questions being confused
here, and I will do my best to clear all of them up. Feel free to post
these comments wherever there is interest in these questions.
My initial comments regarding this subject were made in response to
Cowan's
original statement that, "The vast majority of my material can be
categorized into 2 areas: (1) Price-Time Vector work and (2) Planetary
cycles. Baumring never mentioned either in the seminars I attended. I
even
asked Brad Stewart, who was around him constantly, if he ever heard
Baumring
mention my price-time vectors (by any name). After carefully researching
his
notes he reluctantly had to agree that he never used that technique."
Actually, I searched my notes and provided Cowan with a several
paragraphs
of examples of the basis and use of the Pythagorean Theorem for
calculating
vectors from only my first 25 pages of seminar notes, which I posted
earlier. Cowan chose to select my statement that Baumring never
presented
this material in his step by step manner, which was the introduction to
my
opinion that the basis of this PTV material was thoroughly presented by
Baumring in several formats.
Cowan's above statement is very misleading since Baumring continually
discussed price-time vectors, and his entire teaching is based upon
Planetary Cycles. My letter to Cowan states that Baumring didn't
present as
outlined in Cowan's question the exact method delineated below, and call
it
PTV's or Price Time Vectors, but presented the entire conceptual basis
for
this application and others, in numerous ways with many examples leaving
them for the students to further apply themselves. The selections taken
from the Baumring Notebooks by another individual in the earlier
postings
were enough to verify this point, and I included a few paragraphs of
further
examples taken from my 3 page letter which I presented to Cowan, in
answer
to his question, confirming this same fact. Below I have included
Cowan's
exact question to which I was responding, followed by my response which
leads to the material out of my notes which was posted earlier. Since
my
letter is 3 pages long, it is too much to post in a forum, but anyone
who
would like to read my complete opinion on the origin, basis and
originality
of these techniques is welcome to email me a
institute@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
and I will send them the complete letter as originally sent to Cowan.
Cowan's question:
Regarding my use of price-time vectors,
Did you ever see Jerry Baumring use the techniques I have outlined in
Lesson
I to calculate a vector? Specifically, are you aware of him:
(1) Measuring the price change between two points,
(2) Measuring the time change between two points,
(3) Squaring these 2 values
(4) Summing these two squares.
(5) And taking the square root of this sum to arrive at a vector
length?
(6) If so, did he ever speak or write about this to anyone in his
seminars?
Sincerely, Bradley Cowan
Following are the three paragraphs from which Cowan extracted my quote,
which will be much more clear in their correct context:
"This is a difficult question to answer in a direct or absolute manner
due
to the nature of the teaching style and philosophy of Dr. Baumring,
which
Greg Ruff, Brad Cowan and I well understand, all having been students of
Dr.
Baumring. Dr. Baumring did not believe in the standard teaching
methodologies according to which a student is presented with an
explanation
of the material to be learned which is then memorized and applied to
case
examples. He believed that this style of explanation and regurgitation
did
the student a disservice in that it continually left the student
dependent
upon explanation for each further step of his education. In
contradistinction to this style of education, Dr. Baumring based his
teaching methodologies upon the principle “Give a man a fish and you
feed
him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed him for life.”
"With this principle in mind, Dr. Baumring would present specific
selections
of reading material covering key topics and concepts organized in a very
specific sequential format. For his seminars he would present a
notebook
made up of a selection of such topical information sequentially
presented,
which the student was expected to have read before the seminar. In the
lecture during the seminar, he would then draw sometimes vague,
sometimes
specific correlations between the different topics presented in the
notebooks, show technical applications on financial market charts, give
explanations of subjects seemingly having no relation to the notebook
selections, and give the students numerous clues as to how to pursue
their
research in order to unify the seemingly fragmented information
presented in
the notebooks and lectures. This methodology forced the student to be
responsible for his own learning process, and to think for himself,
rather
than to merely regurgitate another’s understanding. Dr. Baumring forced
his
students to become research scientists, requiring them to engage in
extensive background study, followed by attempts at practical market
application often ending in failure, followed by reanalysis of the
problem,
until the student, with minimal guidance, would arrive through personal
discovery at an insight, easily reproducible and comprehensible since
the
student had worked to arrive at the discovery himself.
"Holding this methodological distinction in mind, it becomes clear why
this
is a hard question to answer particularly in consideration of the
context of
a dispute over the application of a conceptual or intellectual
property. I
can answer the question of whether Dr. Baumring ever, to my knowledge,
presented a step by step explanation of the PTV calculation technique
exactly as presented by Bradley Cowan in Four-Dimensional Stock Market
Structures and Cycles. The answer would be no, as he rarely presented
any
step by step methodological process, but instead presented the
conceptual
foundations and clues to their correlation and application, leaving the
intelligent and hard-working student to discover these conceptual
correlations and applications himself, as Brad Cowan has successfully
and
respectfully done.
"Besides this, Dr. Baumring’s methodology was to present a holistic
synthesis interrelating a vast array of universal processes and natural
laws
leading to an understanding and analysis of the laws of a natural
phenomenon, such as the multidimensional growth of a market. " ***Here
follows the few paragraphs previously posted, with examples of
Baumring's
presentations and discussions of the Pythagorean theorem, vectors and
the
other bases of Cowan's techniques..***
The letter continues by further explaining that even without Baumring's
presentation of this material, the Pythagorean Theorem is a 2500 year
old
formula as presented by Pythagoras, and originates even much further
back in
time than that, having been understood by the Vedic and Egyptian
civilizations even earlier, whence Pythagoras learned it. When one
understands that to merely take this theorem as taught to every high
school
student in geometry class, and label the horizontal axis "Time", and the
vertical axis "Price", the hypotenuse would be "Time-Price", and by the
most
simple presentation of the concept of a vector, one would have this
entire
procedure. Cowan himself states that Baumring included excerpts of
concepts
for simple engineering and math books which everyone knows, and it
should be
clear how valuable these simple excerpts are when presented together in
the
context of the markets. Cowan was a perceptive student and applied
these
techniques which were then presented in detail with applications in his
books. His clear presentation of it, however, does not make it his
original
idea or application. This theorem has been used in many fields in
similar
ways for millennia. Cowan may have trademarked the names "PTV" and
"Price-Time Vector", but a trademark only refers to the name, not to any
ownership of any rights of intellectual property, which is a completely
different issue altogether, and is not something that could be
exclusively
owned by him as it has been public domain for thousands of years. All
of
this is explained in my original letter to Cowan.
This should clear up the who said what issue, and as I mentioned, anyone
requiring further validation of these facts is welcome to read this
complete
letter themselves.
There seem to be several further issues around which many of these
discussions are centered, to which I can hopefully add some further
clarification. Two in particular are: 1.) Was Cowan influenced by
Baumring,
and is he neglecting to give credit where deserved and instead
attempting to
discredit the Baumring's work ? 2.) Is Cowan's work itself of value
whatever its origins?
Concerning the first question, I think the general consensus, and the
considerable proof presented make it clear that the subject of vectors
used
for calculating market price and time action was a fundamental element
of
Baumring's teaching. Everyone who has ever studied Baumring's work is
clear
that the material presented by Cowan is extremely similar to that
previously
presented by Baumring. Knowing that Cowan studied with Baumring for a
period of years, attending 7 seminars, it is hard to believe that he was
not
influenced by the teaching he received, or else why would he have
continued
to attend at all? Had Cowan even simply given an honorable mention to
Baumring in any of his books, none of these questions would have ever
arisen. However, since Cowan prefaces his first book with the statement
in
bold capitals, "IT IS THE AUTHOR'S INTENTION THROUGHOUT THIS COURSE TO
GIVE
CREDIT FOR ANY MATERIAL THAT HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY PRESENTED BY ANOTHER
AUTHOR, OR WHICH MAY HAVE BEEN UNDERSTOOD BY ANYONE ELSE", the question
of
origins and credit of source material has become a matter of controversy
since the first release of his books. Many of his first books were sold
to
past Baumring students most of whom have expressed their surprise at the
lack of mention of Baumring's influence, when it is clear that even the
suggested study list contained in the first pages of Cowan's first book
also
comes right out of Baumring's teachings and Notebooks. It is funny that
Cowan chides what he calls the freshman/sophomore reading material of
the
Baumring Notebooks, then goes on to recommend exactly the same
material. I
wonder how many people would consider Gann, Cole, Plato, Tubbs,
Helmholtz,
Bayer, Blavatsky, Garrett, and the dozens of other famous and highly
respected scientists, philosophers, traders, mystics, and metaphysicians
contained in Baumring Notebooks as freshman/sophomore material. Most of
the
material contained in those Notebooks was written by authors who command
a
considerably higher level of respect and veneration than he who accuses
them
of simplicity. And there is far more than just engineering and science
sections in those Notebooks, there is a considerable amount of rare
market
material, metaphysics, and much much more in those several thousand
pages of
background selections.
These questions have been continually under debate for about 6 years
now,
and I have, over this time, heard Cowan's own statements vary radically
regarding his relationship to Baumring and his valuation of Baumring's
work.
Most individuals for years had no idea that Cowan ever studied with
Baumring, and it was not a topic that was made generally known, but in
more
recent times it has become more common knowledge. In my personal
correspondences with Cowan and interaction with many of his closest
followers, there has always been a general recognition of the value of
Baumring's work, but then I am informed of these extremist statements
posted
in some of these discussion groups that Cowan learned NOTHING from
Baumring
nor did anyone with an engineering background, and that Baumring was
primarily a charismatic salesman who only made money from his private
students, I know that these are antagonistic and defensive statements
which
do not adhere to the truth.
I mentioned before that Cowan himself has made statements to me
confirming
the value of Baumring's work and even asking, himself, to be involved in
its
further distribution and development, something which I did not feel was
appropriate considering exactly these issues we are again discussing
now. I
quote the following from a letter addressed to me, from Brad Cowan,
dated
8/27/94, in response to the fulfillment of an exchange made between
Cowan
and myself, of some of my personal notes from my studies with Baumring
for
some of his materials. The letter begins with Cowan asking for a better
copy of my notes as they were written in pencil and the copies were hard
to
read, then:
"Also, I will honor your request to not show these notes to anyone."
"I may be interested in working out a business arrangement with you in
the
future where I would publish these notes and edit my comments at various
stages of the thought process. This would be the exact opposite of what
you
are thinking now in keeping these notes private. If you are interested
in
doing this is would be a huge amount of work on my part. I would want
to
add a first chapter on the life of Jerry Baumring. This decision is up
to
you. We would have to work out a percentage agreement. One thing is
certain, you would recover your 25K, albeit not through the mechanism
you
originally thought. Book royalties last a lifetime."
"I have skimmed some of the notes (parts that are readable) and was kind
of
amazed that he taught material that I had to find on my own. Some of
the
similarities between my work and what he taught a few "chosen" students
are
uncanny."
The letter concludes with a paragraph about his learning of Baumring's
death, and the release of his own books. With these comments in mind,
it
will probably not be hard for others to see why I have always been aware
of
Cowan's recognition of the value of Baumring's work, and have been
continuously surprised when I have heard extremist statements about
Baumring
being a fraud, a charlatan, and about there being no similarity between
Cowan's and his work. Here you have it out of the horse's mouth, and I
would be happy to show this letter to anyone who needs further
verification,
if necessary. It is clear that Cowan would not be interested in writing
a
biography and commentary on Baumring's work if he did not respect it and
think it of value. And he says outright that the similarities between
his
and Baumring's work are "uncanny". Personally I never found them that
uncanny considering that Cowan studied with Baumring and attended 7
seminars. Whether Cowan learned nothing at those seminars and just
coincidentally happened to find much of the same material himself I'll
leave
up to everyone's own judgment.
Cowan comments at my pettiness in mentioning the Chatelain material,
however, my mention of the Chatelain material which also was originally
not
credited, was simply a further example of the same problem. Considering
the
opening statement of Cowan's books, it would seem that such details
would be
of greatest importance, since he states that as his first intent,
himself.
I am happy that Brad has now included a reference to the Chatelain
material,
though this legally may not even be enough since the book is still under
Copyright, meaning that permission from the publisher to include this
material is very likely necessary for its legal inclusion in Cowan's
book.
I'm not so sure that such points can be considered nit-picky considering
they are based upon Federal Copyright Law.
Cowan also asks me why Baumring had such a high drop out rate. I'm not
sure
what he is talking about because after four years of teaching, over 30
of
the 40 original students of the first seminar series were still
attending,
and two further series of seminars had been started with around 30 more
students in each because of the continually increasing demand for
Baumring's
teachings. Having spent considerable time at the Investment Centre, I
know
that there was a continuous flow of new interest in the seminars, mostly
as
a result of referrals from current students. Cowan also mentions a
number
of rumors about Baumring's trading, personal habits and the like. I can
only say that there are always people who have mud to sling at anyone
they
take issue with, just as we have seen Cowan make many of questionable
statements in these discussions which have now been shown to clearly
contradict opinions and facts that he previously stated. I would advise
everyone to judge a man by his work and his own personal statements and
integrity rather than by rumor and hearsay.
Cowan also asks about Wendy Baumring's need for royalties from her
husband's
courses. The primary answer to this is that it is her legal right.
Baumring's compilations are protected under Federal Copyright Law, and
when
Cowan states that, "If it would not be such a pain in the neck, I would
just
copy those notebooks and give them away free to anyone that wanted
them," I
wonder at his sense of honesty and integrity in even considering to
steal
the legal rights of Baumring's widow to receive the royalties on the
publications of her deceased husband. Federal Law can truly be a pain
in
the neck, as Cowan makes clear to everyone in his non-disclosure
agreements
and in his listing of fines for abuse of his rights listed in his books.
Everyone with Cowan's attitude should have no problem just photo-copying
his
books and giving them out for free, as he has considered doing with
Baumring's work. Both Lambert-Gann and the Sacred Science Institute
have
already experienced this philosophy of Cowan's, since he pirated the
material for his Gann Courses from the originals he purchased from
Lambert-Gann and the Investment Centre, and then turned around and
copied
them and began selling them to the public at radically reduced prices
with
his company name stamped all over the pages, for his sole personal
benefit.
I wonder myself at Cowan's need to go to the trouble to appropriate
other's
materials in order to sell discounted copies of them himself when he is
supposedly making million dollar trades.
Regarding the success of various Baumring students, I know that Cowan is
not
even in contact with more than a few of Baumring's students, and has no
idea
of their trading abilities or financial circumstances, so anything he
could
say on this topic is marginal and even contradicted by a number of old
Baumring students in the public arena. By the same token, has anyone
out
there yet found a Cowan student who is making consistent profits using
his
trading methods? I know a number of people who have been studying
Cowan's
work since its first release, and have not had one tell me that it works
to
the level that they are making consistent forecasts and good money from
it.
Isn't that where these discussion forums began??
Lastly, there is the question of the value of Cowan's work, whatever the
truth of its source and originality. In all fairness to Cowan, I will
readily acknowledge that his work is interesting and useful as a
supplement
to the more holistic teachings of Baumring, Gann, Bayer and the great
market
masters. As Cowan stated earlier in these discussions, his work covers
primarily two areas, PTV's and Planetary Cycles. These are two of the
top
dozen most important topics originally presented by Baumring, and the
serious Baumring or Gann student will find some useful research compiled
in
Cowan's books which will be helpful in putting together the larger
picture.
But there is much, much more to market forecasting and Gann theory than
PTV's and Planetary Cycles. Cowan states himself that supposedly no one
ever used PTV's before, so if Gann didn't use them, there is obviously
much
more to Gann, and since everyone knows that Gann used both geocentric
and
heliocentric astrology, considering Cowan only uses heliocentric there
is
again, obviously much more needed. However, Cowan's books do represent
some
of the only material which further elaborates the correct paradigm as
originally presented by Gann and Baumring, and from that standpoint it
is
useful in a complete study. Just don't expect it to be all conclusive,
there is much, much more to studying financial market forecasting than
reading 3 books. Every serious student should understand this and be
prepared to pursue every valuable lead they can possible find and to
accumulate every piece of valuable material they have the opportunity to
acquire. The reason that the Sacred Science Institute possesses such a
huge
number of resources is that we purchase everything important we can find
on
every subject of interest, as did Baumring and as does every other
serious
researcher, leaving us with a library containing over 10,000 volumes of
rare
and important material. Everyone need not read this many books, since
teachers such as Gann and Baumring have left reading lists for serious
students to pursue, but anyone who does not follow these leads at
minimum,
will be very unlikely to make much progress in their research. Remember
what Gann said, "Knowledge is Power!"
So enough, this should hopefully cover just about everything there is to
say, and remove some of the misconception which exists surrounding these
issues. Anyone with further questions may contact me at
institute@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, or may visit our website at
www.sacreedscience.com where many similar points are further discussed.
I wish you the best of luck in your research,
Brad Stewart
|