40/70 Benchmark

Damn, I was expecting it vault positive as soon as the new EURO run modeled a 2.5 ONI next fall.

That isn't what I said......what I said was the majority of the excessive warmth from the 2015 was stored in the western Pacific, which triggered a default cool ENSO paradigm moving forward. That being said, there actually is a documented propensity for powerful ENSO events to trigger opposite phases..it's called the delayed oscillation theory. 72-73 was followed by La Nina....1982-1983....followed by la Nina....1997, 2015 and 2023...ditto.

The more central-based super warm ENSO of 2015 triggered the development of the warm pool, just as I believe a super-eastern biased El Nino would eradicate it.

I think it will be crucial to compare SSTs this fall to 2015 and 2023.

2015 super Nino triggered the development of the west Pacific warm pool, which is the primary catalyst for the persistent cool ENSO residue that has predominated the past decade. It wasn't as severe as 2023 because the PDO was strongly positive, agreed.

Bring it...I welcome that....I know it will also mean warmth, but I'm sick of the drier winters.

Yes, RONI lagged the ONI (2.4 vs 2.8)...like 2023, but the PDO was positive on 2025, whereas 2023 was negative like 1972.

Well, I had a great event in January 2024, but it wasn't too widespread. I had 19" on 1/7/2024. I think we should be able to pull off something more akin to 2015-2016 versus 2023-2024.

Recall in January 2016 we had the big blizzard in January, and then a record arctic surge around V-Day.

I know Chuck disagrees, but I don't think it matters much....it will be very warm. I think keeping it more west-focused, like 2015, just gives a better shot at a big storm and a cold interval or two.

Important to see how the PDO evolves, too.....I don't think that it will, but if it were to remain negative with the RONI continuing to lag to ONI, then good night nurse.

2023 would be my top analog, though probably not quite as warm and snowless given a bit more favorable of a look in the north Pacific.

So 2.0 RONI and 2.5 ONI....not good. I'll go torch if that remains consistent. I would rather see the RONI higher.

What does it have for the ONI?

I see your point, but I have a couple counters that you neglect to consider. I know for a fact that modern snowfall measuring techniques are not homogeneous....secondly, while I do agree that the 6 hourly method does increase totals on average because it's actually measuring snowfall, which is different from to snow depth, there are some mixed precipitation events in which it will not.