Roger Smith

Hey yoda, sorry I didn't get back to you, this is my first time back into the thread since a few hours before you posted. Our late penalties begin to increase just around when you posted, so you didn't do too badly on that, -10% and maybe your later entry gained you some of that back. Look for your entry in the table after I get going here, and I will re-set consensus.

Table of entries for February 2020 FORECASTER ________________ DCA _ NYC _ BOS ___ ORD _ ATL _ IAH ____ DEN _ PHX _ SEA Brian5671 ___________________ +5.0 _ +4.0 _ +3.5 __ +4.0 _ +5.0 _ +3.0 ___ +1.0 _ --0.5 _ --2.0 RodneyS _____________________ +4.6 _ +4.2 _ +4.0 __ +2.7 _ +3.8 _ +3.4 ___ --2.5 _ --1.7 _ +0.8 DonSutherland.1 _____________ +3.5 _ +3.2 _ +2.7 __ +1.5 _ +1.6 _ +0.7 ___ +2.0 _ +3.0 _ --1.0 BKViking _____________________ +3.3 _ +3.0 _ +2.9 __ +0.6 _ +2.2 _ +1.2 ___ --2.0 _ --1.3 _ --2.2 wxallannj _____________________+3.2 _ +3.7 _ +3.1 __ +0.8 _ +2.4 _ +1.2 ___ --1.6 _ --1.1 _ --0.7 RJay _________________________ +3.0 _ +3.0 _ +3.0 __ --1.5 _ +2.0 _ +1.0 ___ --2.5 _ --1.5 _ --2.0 ___ Consensus _______________ +3.0 _ +2.8 _ +2.7 __ +0.5 _ +2.1 _ +1.2 ___ --0.8 _ --0.8 _ --1.0 Tom _________________________ +2.9 _ +2.6 _ +2.6 __ +0.5 _ +2.1 _ +0.9 ___ +0.2 _ --0.6 _ --0.8 hudsonvalley21 ______________ +2.6 _ +2.5 _ +2.4 __ --0.5 _ +2.4 _ +1.7 ___ --1.1 _ --0.9 _ --1.4 Yoda ________ (-10%) _________ +1.6 _ +1.0 _ --0.2 __ --1.7 _ +3.1 _ +1.0 ___ --2.9 _ --1.2 _ --2.8 Scotty Lightning ______________+1.0 _ +1.0 _ +1.0 __ +0.5 _ +1.5 _ +1.5 ___ +0.5 __ 0.0 __ 0.0 wxdude64 ____ (-3%) __________+0.5 _ +0.3 _ --0.3 __ --1.1 _ +1.3 _ +0.8 ___ --0.5 _ --0.7 _ --1.1 Roger Smith __________________ +0.3 _ +0.1 _ --0.2 __ --0.4 _ +1.5 _ +1.5 ___ +7.0 _ +4.0 _ +6.3 ___ Normal _____________________ 0.0 __ 0.0 __ 0.0 ___ 0.0 __ 0.0 __ 0.0 _____ 0.0 __ 0.0 __ 0.0 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Consensus is the median of twelve forecasts so the average of 6th and 7th ranked forecasts. Highest and lowest forecasts color coded, but Normal has coldest forecast for DCA, NYC, ATL and IAH.

Here's an update on the snowfall contest. FORECASTER _________________DCA _ NYC _ BOS ___ ORD _ DTW _ BUF____ DEN _ SEA _ BTV ___ Snowfall to date (Feb 29) ___ 0.6 __ 4.8 _ 15.1 ___ 26.9 __36.6 _ 62.5 ___ 46.4 __ 0.7 _ 63.0 Tom __________________________ 27.6 _ 48.1 _ 59.8 ___ 44.5 _ 39.8 _ 97.6 ___ 68.6 __ 4.8 _ 85.1 wxallannj _____________________ 22.4 _ 33.5 _ 44.7 ___ 38,9 _ 38.8 _ 69.6 ___ 41.3 __ 7.2 _ 79.4 wxdude64 ____________________ 20.6 _ 42.5 _ 54.1 ___ 50.6 _ 52.7 _100.9 ___ 69.8 __ 9.6 _ 97.4 BKViking ______________________19.0 _ 36.0 _ 51.0 ___ 42.0 _ 29.0 _ 84.0 ___ 55.0 __ 8.0 _ 77.0 hudsonvalley21 _______________ 15.8 _ 31.2 _ 47.7 ___ 42.2 _ 52.6 _ 91.3 ___ 61.1 __10.4 _ 88.8 Roger Smith __________________ 15.5 _ 38.5 _ 55.8 ___ 60.5 _ 60.2 _102.5 ___109.7__ 7.5 _110.5 RodneyS ______________________14.4 _ 25.1 _ 40.0 ___ 35.0 _ 38.0 _100.0 ___ 80.0 __ 4.0 _ 88.0 Scotty Lightning _______________12.0 _ 24.0 _ 36.0 ___ 48.0 _ 67.0 _105.0 ___45.0 __14.0 _ 90.0 DonSutherland1 _______________10.0 _ 23.5 _ 36.0 ___ 30.0 _ 35.0 _110.0 ___ 83.0 __ 6.5 _ 90.0 ___ consensus (mean) _________ 17.5 _ 33.6 _ 47.2 ____ 44.1 _ 45.9 __95.7 ___ 68.2 __ 8.0 _ 94.0 ___ % to date ___________________ 3.5 __ 14 ___ 32 ______ 61 ___ 80 ___ 65 _____ 68 ___ 8.7 __ 67

Final Scoring for January 2020 Scoring for BOS had to go to the "max 60" format since even the best forecast had a raw score of 50. Also DEN required minimum progression, the maximum raw score was only 42 (Scotty Lightning). Scoring for ORD did not require a boost as RodneyS prevented it with a raw score of 71. (final anom +6.3 means one point per 0.1 to +1.3 and two points per 0.1 beyond that to Rodney's max of 4.2, had anyone been in the 5.0-6.3 zone they would have been adding on a point per 0.1 there). Other scoring has a clear cut raw score above 60 to prevent any minimum progression scoring. This was a month where you could "cash in" on an extreme forecast for sure. ^ Scores adjusted for "minimum progression" rule, max 60, scoring intervals of 4 points used. Your raw score counts if it's higher than the progression value. This applied to one score (05 rather than 04). This year I will be changing how I score Normal, it cannot receive points from minimum progression, that way we know what the actual "climate" score of Normal really is. In the old system, Normal would have scored 2 points at BOS, but this year, zero. For DEN, Normal would have scored 38 (being between assigned scores of 40 voided by tie at 44, and 36) but the climate score is 22 there. FORECASTER ________________ DCA_NYC_BOS__east__ORD_ATL_IAH__cent__ c/e __DEN_PHX_SEA__west ___ TOTAL RodneyS ______________________ 72 _ 55 _ 52^___ 179 __ 71 _ 71 _ 74 __ 216 __ 395 __ 52^_ 58 _ 46 __ 156 _____ 551 Brian5671 ____________________ 96 _ 85 _ 60^___ 241 __ 00 _ 99 _ 64 __ 163 __ 404 __ 04^_ 02 _ 00 __ 006 _____ 410 RJay __________________________ 70 _ 77 _ 56^___ 203 __ 27 _ 31 _ 14 __ 072 __ 275 __ 36^_ 48 _ 00 __ 084 _____ 359 wxallannj ______________________42 _ 45 _ 48^___ 135 __ 07 _ 35 _ 24 __ 066 __ 201 __ 44^_ 80 _ 26 __ 150 _____ 351 dwave ________________________ 72 _ 75 _ 48^___ 195 __ 12 _ 25 _ 10 __ 047 __ 242 __ 16^_ 34 _ 00 __ 050 _____ 292 ___ Consensus ________________ 30 _ 21 _ 32^___ 083 __ 07 _ 31 _ 30 __ 068 __ 151 __ 36^_ 72 _ 32 __ 140 _____ 291 BKViking ______________________ 30 _ 25 _ 40^___ 095 __ 05 _ 31 _ 30 __ 066 __ 161 __ 36^_ 72 _ 20 __ 128 _____ 289 JakkelWx ______________________28 _ 21 _ 40^___ 089 __ 07 _ 37 _ 48 __ 092 __ 181 __ 12^_ 88 _ 06 __ 106 _____ 287 hudsonvalley21 ________________ 14 _ 21 _ 24^___ 059 __ 25 _ 23 _ 10 __ 058 __ 117 __ 44^_ 80 _ 40 __ 164 _____ 281 Scotty Lightning ________________10 _ 05 _ 05 ___ 020 __ 00 _ 21 _ 34 __ 055 __ 075 __ 60^_ 88 _ 50 __ 198 _____ 273 Don Sutherland.1 ______________ 30 _ 33 _ 32^___ 095 __ 17 _ 11 _ 04 __ 032 __ 127 __ 36^_ 62 _ 48 __ 146 _____ 273 yoda __________________________ 32 _ 21 _ 16^___ 069 __ 04 _ 35 _ 44 __ 083 __ 152 __ 08^_ 78 _ 34 __ 120 _____ 272 Tom ___________________________ 16 _ 11 _ 16^___ 043 __ 13 _ 27 _ 16 __ 056 __ 099 __ 48^_ 88 _ 32 __ 168 _____ 267 rclab ___________________________05 _ 00 _ 00 ___ 005 __ 00 _ 11 _ 24 __ 035 __ 040 __ 56^_ 88 _ 66 __ 210 _____ 250 wxdude64 _____________________ 20 _ 12 _ 08^___ 040 __ 08 _ 33 _ 40 __ 081 __ 121 __ 20^_ 74 _ 28 __ 122 _____ 243 Roger Smith ___________________ 16 _ 14 _ 28^___ 058 __ 05 _ 31 _ 08 __ 044 __ 102 __ 36^_ 68 _ 30 __ 134 _____ 236 Rhino16 _______________________ 00 _ 05 _ 20^___ 025 __ 00 _ 13 _ 30 __ 043 __ 068 __ 04^_ 52 _ 54 __ 110 _____ 178 ___ Normal _____________________00 _ 00 _ 00 ___ 000 __ 00 _ 00 _ 04 __ 004 __ 004 __ 22 _ 92 _ 50 __ 164 _____ 168 ============================================================================== Extreme forecast report All nine locations qualify for an extreme forecast award for the warmest forecast(s), even PHX which only finished at +0.5. Brian 5671 scoops four of them (DCA, NYC, BOS and ATL. RodneyS has two for ORD and IAH. RClab has two for PHX and SEA (PHX shared with Scotty Lightning and Normal which had the highest score but cannot win solo). and Scotty Lightning has a second one for DEN. Tom tied for top score with the extreme forecasts so gets a win also for PHX. ================================================================================ Congrats to RodneyS and Brian 5671 for their top scores in various sections, also well done to RClab for the high score in the west. Although two locations (ATL, IAH) will be adjustable for anomalies, all scores will move in lock-step.

I think that storm in early March 1914 was more noteworthy for low central pressure and wind speeds than snowfall, must have dumped some snow inland New England but I seem to remember NYC had a record low pressure? Don must know. Another March as cold as 1960 may be a big ask, that one was top ten cold for many locations. It stayed wintry to the end of the month in the GL region. Will speculate that Feb 19-23 is the sweet spot for any late winter heroics, should be a good set of energy peaks then, hoping the GFS is on the right track with its recent output showing a rather promising pattern developing. Of course the best part of the GFS is usually day 16. Here's that storm on the wetterzentrale map archive, appears to have been a fast deepening coastal that moved up from east of FL on Feb 28 to east of NJ then stalled close to current JFK-ISP. https://www.wetterzentrale.de/reanalysis.php?map=2&model=noaa&var=1&jaar=1914&maand=03&dag=02&uur=0600&h=0&tr=360&nmaps=24#mapref The winter of 1913-14 was a strange one, at Toronto they had a very mild Dec, Jan went from extreme cold mid-month to record warmth end of month, then Feb returned to record cold mid-month, then this coastal bomb.

Why do we even have a minus sign on our keyboards? That is the burning question .. +0.3 _ +0.1 _ --0.2 __ --0.4 _ +1.5 _ +1.5 __ +7.0 _ +4.0 _ +6.3 off to deal with the inevitable avalanches

Was there not a very deep low off the NJ coast around March 1-2, 1914?

I may be hopecasting but it feels like this winter is going to ease into some kind of big storm maybe in March. There wasn't much to the winter of 1992-93 before February (one fairly big storm in early December?). Energy seems to be running rather low but the models are starting to amplify. You get the feeling maybe this winter won't go quietly. But it has been one big snoozefest to date, even where I live and we get a lot of snow, it has not been all that active. We have nickel-and-dimed our way to 18" of snow cover but normal here is 24-30".

Predict the temperature anomalies (F deg) relative to 1981-2010 for DCA _ NYC _ BOS _ ORD _ ATL _ IAH _ DEN _ PHX _ SEA (deadline 06z Sat Feb 1st) good luck !!

8-12 inch potential on Feb 8th (12z GFS) so maybe this is not over yet.

Updated anomalies and projections: ____________________________ DCA _ NYC _ BOS __ ORD _ ATL _ IAH ___ DEN _ PHX _ SEA (8th) ____ (7d anom) _______ +8.9 _+8.2 _+10.5 __+10.6 _+6.0 _+4.4 __ +7.1 _ --0.9 _+6.6 (15th) ___ (14d anom) _____+10.2_+10.0_+12.3__ +9.2_+10.5 _+5.7 ___ +4.1 _--1.4_ +1.0 (22nd) __ (21d anom) ______ +7.4 _ +6.9 _ +8.8 __ +5.3 _ +8.3 _+6.5 ___ +3.3 _--0.2_ +1.3 (8th) ____ (p14d) ___________ +7.0 _+6.5 _+8.0 __ +5.0 _ +4.0 _ +2.5 __ +3.0 _--1.0 _ +1.0 (15th) ___ (p21d) ___________+5.0 _+5.0 _+5.5 __ +4.0 _+5.0 _+3.0 ___ +1.5 _--1.0 _--0.5 (22nd) __ (p28d) ____________+5.0 _+4.5 _+6.0 __ +3.5 _+5.0 _+4.0 ___ +2.5 __0.0 _+1.8 (8th) ____ (24d) _____________+5.0 _+5.0 _+5.0 __ +1.0 _ +2.0 __0.0 ____0.0 __ 0.0 _ --2.5 (15th) ___ (31d) _____________+3.5 _+3.5 _+3.5 __ +2.0 _+4.0 _+2.0 ___ +2.0 __0.0 _+0.5 (22nd) ___ (31d) ____________ +4.5 _+4.0 _+5.0 __ +3.0 _+4.5 _+3.5 ___ +2.0 __0.0 _+2.0 (end of month final anoms) _ +6.4 _+6.5 _+9.0 __ +6.3 _+5.9 _+4.8 ___ +3.9 _+0.4 _+3.0 __________________ _ _______________ _ __________________ (8th) _ The month has started out very mild in all regions. Much colder air is pressing south from western Canada and will soon be impacting on those positive anomalies in ORD, DEN and SEA. The effects will be weaker or slower to arrive in the east and south. Even in the outlook period (days 8 to 16) the east coast will remain rather mild with occasional colder interludes, while the severe cold in central regions may begin to shift more to eastern Canada. (15th) _ Large positive anomalies have continued to build over central and eastern regions while the west turned quite cold in the second week. Forecasts for this coming week begin to eat away at the larger anomalies and should see them reduced to contest-range values at some point around the 21st. This trend will peter out later in the month with a more variable regime expected. End of month projections show reduced but still fairly sizeable positive anomalies at most locations. (22nd) _ The huge anomalies at mid-month have been somewhat reduced but not by quite as much as predicted a week ago. The trend from now to end of month looks rather close to average January values and a good chunk of the present anomalies will survive. Will post some preliminary scoring based on these estimates which are by and large higher than most forecasts except for western stations. (Feb 1st) _ Sorry to report that life got rather hectic here and I never had a chance to create any provisional scoring. We're now into final scoring territory with the final anomalies rolling in overnight. Will be posting the scoring table soon, it is now final with all the anomalies confirmed (see table above) and the next post for the scores. At least in January I don't have the task of working on the annual scoring table (hurray for January, my favorite month).

Looks like a slowly improving trend over the second half of January from current guidance. No obvious big hits but potential is growing towards end of the current GFS run. I thought this might be a back-loaded winter anyway so if it starts up that quickly, could become epic.

Thanks for entering the Jan 2020 contest. Welcome to about half a dozen new and returning forecasters, hope you will continue to participate. And belated thanks to RJay whom I believe has been helping us out through 2019 by pinning these threads on a regular basis. So here are the forecasts. I have added a summary of scoring procedures for the benefit of our new entrants. Your forecasts appear in the same order as DCA forecasts from warmest to coldest, if those are tied, then NYC determines it, etc. Table of forecasts for January 2020 FORECASTER __________________ DCA _ NYC _ BOS __ ORD _ ATL _ IAH __ DEN _ PHX _ SEA Brian5671 ____________________ +6.0 _ +5.0 _ +4.5 ___ 0.0 _ +6.0 _ +3.0 __ --3.0 _ --4.5 _ --4.0 dwave ________________________ +4.3 _ +4.5 _ +2.2 __ +1.2 _ +1.7 _ +0.3 __ --1.4 _ --2.9 _ --3.0 RodneyS ______________________ +4.3 _ +3.5 _ +3.5 __ +4.2 _ +4.0 _ +3.5 __ +0.2 _ --1.7 _ +0.3 RJay __________________________ +4.2 _ +4.6 _ +4.2 __ +2.0 _ +2.0 _ +0.5 __ --1.0 _ --2.2 _ --2.5 wxallannj ______________________+2.8 _ +3.0 _ +2.2 __ +0.7 _ +2.2 _ +1.0 __--0.7 _ --0.6 _ --0.7 yoda __________________________ +2.3 _ +1.8 _ +0.9 __ +0.4 _ +2.2 _ +2.0 __ --1.7 _ --0.7 _ --0.3 Don Sutherland.1 ______________ +2.2 _ +2.4 _ +1.3 __ +1.5 _ +1.0 __ 0.0 __ --1.0 _ --1.5 _ +0.4 BKViking ______________________ +2.2 _ +2.0 _ +1.7 __ +0.5 _ +2.0 _ +1.3 __ --1.0 _ --1.0 _ --1.0 ___ Consensus ________________ +2.2 _ +1.8 _ +1.3 __ +0.7 _ +2.0 _ +1.3 __ -1.0 _ --1.0 _ --0.4 JakkelWx ______________________+2.1 _ +1.8 _ +1.7 __ +0.7 _ +2.3 _ +2.2 __ --1.5 _ --0.2 _ --1.7 wxdude64 _____________________ +1.7 _ +1.2 _ +0.7 __ +0.8 _ +2.1 _ +1.8 __--1.1 _ --0.9 _ --0.6 Roger Smith ___________________ +1.5 _ +1.4 _ +1.2 __ +0.5 _ +2.0 _ +0.2 __ --1.0 _ --1.2 _ --0.5 Tom ___________________________ +1.5 _ +1.1 _ +0.9 __ +1.3 _ +1.8 _ +0.6 __ --0.5 _ --0.2 _ --0.4 hudsonvalley21 ________________ +1.4 _ +1.8 _ +1.1 __ +1.9 _ +1.6 _ +0.3 __ --0.7 _ --0.6 __ 0.0 Scotty Lightning _______________ +1.0 _ +0.5 _ +0.5 ___ 0.0 _ +1.5 _ +1.5 __ +1.0 _ +1.0 _ +0.5 rclab __________________________ +0.5 _ --0.5 _ --1.4 __ --0.9 _ +1.0 _ +1.0 __ +0.5 _ +1.0 _ +1.3 ___ Normal ______________________ 0.0 __ 0.0 __ 0.0 ____0.0 __ 0.0 __ 0.0 ____ 0.0 __ 0.0 __ 0.0 Rhino16 _______________________ --0.3 _ +0.5 _ +1.0 __ --0.1 _ +1.1 _ +1.3 __ --3.0 _ --2.0 _ +0.7 ____________________________________________________________________ In the table above, highest and lowest forecasts are color coded. Normal is lower for ATL and tied lowest for IAH. Scoring procedures: 1. For most months, scores are based on 100 for a perfect call, less 2 pts per 0.1 error. Scores that would be negative remain zero. 2. For months with anomalies greater than 5.0 (+ or --), the system is similar but for the amount by which the anomaly exceeds 5.0, that portion deducts only one point (at both the low and high ends). Example, you predict +3.5 and outcome is +6.0, your score would be 50 using the first rule, but is boosted by 10 since you lose only one point per 0.1 error from 5.0 to 6.0, making your score 60. Or if you score from zero up, you have 10 points by +1.0 then add another 50 for +2.5 further correct portion. In this way, anyone with the right anomaly sign always gets a non-zero score. If a month ends up with a greater anomaly than +10 (for example, March 2012) then scores are calculated from percentage of anomaly achieved (+8.0 against +12.0 would score 2/3 or 67). 3. If neither of those procedures result in a raw score of 60 or higher from one forecaster, then we go to a "minimum progression" of scores where the closest forecast gets 60, and all others get a pro-rated value down to a zero value for the least accurate forecast. However, any progression score that is lower than your individual raw score would convert to the higher raw score, so you can only gain, not lose, from this rule. As a result of this rule, some forecast always scores at least 60. This month, with 16 forecasts, the step function will be 4 points (60, 56, 52 etc ending in zero). Tied forecasts both or all score the highest of the step values (e.g., three tied for fourth best forecast this month would all get 48 points). 4. Consensus and Normal are scored using all the same rules. Your rank and score assigned, however, is only within the group of forecasters. Consensus and Normal can be allotted intermediate step scores in the progression system, or they may be equal to a forecaster's score. Consensus forecast is the median rather than the mean (to reduce if not eliminate any influence of one or two outliers). I am going to keep track of two scores for Normal, one a contest score, and the other a raw score based on no adjustments from rule one, that way we have a log of the total departure from normal. 5. Late penalties are strictly applied once we get past this month. For 2020, these will be 1% for every four hours or portion late through 36h (possible 9% penalty to 18z 2nd) then a further 1% per hour.

Will say 1492 and first high risk a major outbreak in the south-central states around Feb 8th-9th.

Well we have a soccer team at least (eleven entrants including all nine of the hardy crew). I am going to extend the free entry period one more day and post notices on all subforums, to see if we can encourage a few more entries. Post your own words of encouragement on my invitation threads, it might help. You can edit your forecasts too, I won't look at anything for a table of entries until Saturday.

Thanks for those entries, please note the later deadline just this month, which would allow you to edit these numbers any time before Jan 3rd 06z (Thursday evening or 0100h EST Friday). I may take advantage of that but for now ... +1.5 _ +1.4 _ +1.2 ___ +0.5 _ +2.0 _ +0.2 ___ --1.0 _ --1.2 _ --0.5

Here comes the year 2020, do you believe it? I don't. (10 point penalty) I will be beating the drums around the regional forums to see if we can improve our turnout, but as long as the regular folk want to keep going, the contest threads will appear until it's just me and three other people (after that, maybe not) ... Our task as always is to predict the anomalies (relative to 1981-2010) for these nine wonderful locations: DCA _ NYC _ BOS __ ORD _ ATL _ IAH ___ DEN _ PHX _ SEA Since I hope to keep up the publicity over the new year's holiday, there will be no late penalties imposed until after Jan 3 0600z (which is late Thursday evening of Jan 2nd). This year (and this applies to the later start for January) the late penalties will be 1% for every portion of four hours late through first 36h (to 18z of 2nd normally, and 4th for January's contest). That takes us to 9 points possible deduction, and then it would be 1 more percentage point per hour until 91 more hours have passed (which takes us to 13z of the 6th). For January, I will increase these to 2% at whatever time is needed to reach that same absolute cut-off time. Good luck -- the 2019 contest final results should be available some time late on January 1st. It's a close fight between RodneyS and wxdude64, looking too mild for my chances.

I just hope it doesn't go full 1949-50 on us, extreme cold developed over my part of the world that winter and after a coldish start to winter it turned very mild in the east at least to mid-Feb before becoming more seasonable. I mention that winter because we are in a very unusual dry pattern here where the PNW meets western Canada. It appears to be breaking down a bit to cold and snowy. That was about the same transition that brought in the severe cold later in Dec 1949 and all of Jan 1950 which ran 15-20 (F) deg below normal in many parts of the west while Jan 1950 was a top ten mild month in the east. The storm track was eventually set up near Chicago running SW-NE. That lasted to mid-Feb then more of a cold pattern with coastal lows. I think we'll see at least a modified version of this in 2019-20 and a good start to winter in the east perhaps reversing form some time around or just after New Years.

_________________________ WOW _____________ YEAH ______________ OKAY _______________ OUCH _____________ ouch _______________ meh _____________ whatever ============================================================== (( __ )) ======================================================== Update on my earlier comments about odd snowfall patterns, we still have not had even 5% of the normal November snowfall where I live, and it is bone dry around this region which is very odd for November. The lower elevations of the Columbia valley (where it leaves Canada and enters WA state) have seen no snow, very little rainfall, and the ground is as dry as it would be in mid-August in our dry summer climate here. So on the principle that it has to snow somewhere if it does not snow here, why not there? BTW I think those are reasonable predictions above, mine are not that different, just havin' a laff.

I have been posting winter snowfall contests here for several years, just can't really get into the mood of it this winter for some unknown reason. I am hoping to be away for a large chunk of time later in the winter which may be one reason. Maybe some other more active member of the sub-forum would like to run a contest. But rather than just dropping it entirely, why not compare notes on expectations. I think the winter will be quite productive (again) in this region and the sweet spot relative to normal may not be far from an axis running NE-SW through Chicago. The current rather cold pattern in the east seems likely to persist for a while then retrogress in mid-winter, placing the storm track just about over the Midwest and central Great Lakes. So I'm expecting maybe 50-60 inches of snow total in ORD and 40-50 for DTW, higher amounts but not necessarily higher compared to normal to the north of ORD to APN. A significant amount of that may have already happened. Probably a rather average lake effect sort of outcome with long intervals not suitable and a few periods very heavy. I think this might be a winter with relatively mild intervals at the core and a return to colder than normal in March-April, prolonging the season. What are you expecting?

I am halfway up a mountain within sight of the BC-WA border and we got some snow in late September (quite a lot at higher elevations) and it has been almost bone dry since then. There is still a very thin snow cover on the local mountains from that dumping but nothing below 5500' asl. I have never seen such a dry pattern as we are in here at this time of year. Think it must mean that weird snowfall anomalies lie ahead, and by definition that means you get snow because zero snow there is not a weird snowfall anomaly. Will be boosting my earlier predictions slightly, just feels to me like one big storm is inevitable for your region with the strength of cold air masses combined with no cut off low tendencies in the southwest (meaning it won't end up wasted over the southern Rockies). Even so, expecting some very mild weather in the mix so this one big storm concept will have to be well timed and worth the pain of the other weeks of anomalous warmth.

BWI _ 27.5" DCA _ 22.1" IAD _ 34.3" RIC _ 15.5" SBY _ 14.5" (could be adjusting this, at the moment I think the sweet spot for northeast US snowfall will be a bit north of your region but cold air will be available at least to mid-Jan and there is probably some chance of a big snowstorm before the pattern shifts to a milder second half of winter) _ some similarity to 95-96 so can't rule out that sort of outcome yet. A very good analogue seems to be 1971-72, how did you fare that winter? (edited my original numbers slightly upward on Nov 7th no real change in thinking just feeling a bit more confident of the one big storm during the good setup before the warmer second half).

Oops, no tie-breaker. But I don;t foresee being tied so there you go. Not looking too bad on the long-range charts for an early end to frost-free season, question might be, would all four go at the same time? Takes a fairly potent cold shot to do that, I would assume, with DCA in such a warmed up location and RIC further south.

Given that voters in most countries are divided on their level of concern about climate change, I think the best political solution is to reshape the paradigm and take climate change out of the equation to some extent, focusing instead on benefits in general from alternative (non-fossil-fuel) energy sources. If there are demonstrable benefits from such a transition, then the climate change issue fades into the background. Another change in political emphasis should be towards mitigation of problems. Whether the alleged problems are caused by AGW, other forms of natural variability, or non-climate factors, these problems need to be addressed. For example, forest fires (or wildfires) are said to be increasing. Maybe they are, maybe not. But more to the point, an advanced society should be able to manage this problem. It is probably more cpmplex than just AGW forcing more fires. There are questions like changing lifestyles (the exurban population increasing rapidly), interface questions, and philosophies about fighting or containing fires. So that sort of climate-related issue can be approached as a self-contained problem that the climate is not a key factor in controlling, in fact it would make a lot of sense to have large changes in our management of the wildfire issue, regardless of what the climate is doing or not doing. To some extent, I think the climate "emergency" is overblown hype, those who peddle it for political gain seem to have no knowledge whatsoever of the range of past weather and climate events. There may be subtle changes as part of AGW, or what we see may be just inevitable natural variability. Either way, it's a safe bet that nothing we do will actually change the future weather observed on our planet by more than a very slight amount. So knowing that, we should have mitigation strategies in place, rather than dealing in these fantasies about paying a tax on carbon to change the weather. That simply isn't going to happen, no matter how many people say so with whatever level of urgency and passion.If the oceans begin to rise in a more dramatic fashion, what can be done about it? Plans must be drawn up for protection or even removal of critical infrastructure, and populations at risk, but only when it becomes apparent that there is no alternative. I don't say this to make denial a policy, I say it because it is the only rational approach. The political parties who deal in a tax-to-solve approach are just deluding themselves and their voters. Their plans cannot possibly work. Mitigation might include diversion of some ocean water into massive desalination/irrigation projects which are needed anyway for other reasons. This is what we should be doing, rather than taxing carbon.

I think that if there are some potent cold shots early in the season (Oct-Nov) it may signal a variable winter to follow, as is often the case, with roughly equal mild or cold spells in the main winter months. I've said elsewhere that the most likely storm track this winter would be something like OK-TN-MD/sPA-seMA and this would imply a variety of storm types for the Mid Atlantic region. The odds would favour one or perhaps two significant winter storms for your region but the core of above normal snowfalls would be north of that storm track, for the northeast, inland PA, n NJ, most of NY and New England. This is of course just amplifying the normal regional outcome, but within that framework, at least I;m not seeing much chance of a blowtorch or dry winter.