Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,509
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    joxey
    Newest Member
    joxey
    Joined

No Joaquin the park forecast for Mets


Ginx snewx

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

What if the Euro ENS have say 70% members with east coast hits up and down coast? Will that give confidence op is wrong?

 

You already know the answer to this. Might give some credence to the op being wrong, but we don't toss. Enough members take it out to sea that you can't discount that scenario.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was gonna post same.

Just because a track is the average of all guidance doesn't mean it is the most likely. In this case, this either gets captured early west or it gets fujiwaraed east.

This also means that unfortunately for NHC, hedging with a mean track to the public may not be the most likely prediction as depicted, but I guess there's no easier way to convey possible impact with uncertainty.

this is a good point as others have mentioned too. '

 

imo it is possible that to varying degrees the Euro is correct in regard to Ida / remnants 'tugging' Joaquin northeastward and the GFS / CMC / etc are correct in capturing Joaquin. its just a tough call to make with such divergent outcomes likely and a low probability of an 'in-between' solution (KACY - KACK landfall). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pardon the interruption but if someone could answer why if the up the coast option is least likely then why has it been the track of choice (at least as days as coastal NJ) according to the NHC up until now?

 

There wasn't the sans-Euro consensus that there is now until today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pardon the interruption but if someone could answer why if the up the coast option is least likely then why has it been the track of choice (at least as far north as coastal NJ) according to the NHC up until now?

 

Have you been to college?

 

just asking because there's an adage employed by Animal House type students:   "If you don't know the answer, always pick C"

 

the idea there is that if you have the same amount of multiple guesses above and below that letter, the probabilities is a random guess would land on C.  

 

not sure if it works...but maybe the path of least regret was to pick a path straight down the middle..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you been to college?

just asking because there's an adage employed by Animal House type students: "If you don't know the answer, always pick C"

the idea there is that if you have the same amount of multiple guesses above and below that letter, the probabilities is a random guess would land on C.

not sure if it works...but maybe the path of least regret was to pick a path straight down the middle..

Ok. This is kind of what I suspected myself.

I just wasn't sure if their decision making was ever done that way.

Interesting

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you been to college?

 

just asking because there's an adage employed by Animal House type students:   "If you don't know the answer, always pick C"

 

the idea there is that if you have the same amount of multiple guesses above and below that letter, the probabilities is a random guess would land on C.  

 

not sure if it works...but maybe the path of least regret was to pick a path straight down the middle..

I always make the multiple choice answers on the quizzes I give equal NOT C

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Curious if any of the NOAA G-IV synoptic information or the extra rawinsonde data has been ingested by any of the models yet?  Or if the US models have it already but the Euro does not?

 

The models are using any extra data that is out there. This is not a case of the Euro having less information than the GFS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always make the multiple choice answers on the quizzes I give equal NOT C

 

ha ha, probably because of that reason -

 

I was in college back before the turn of the Century... you know, when dino's roamed?

 

It was a fresh and new sort of 'not really' cheating > 50% of all students engaged in... kind of like that play in the Playoffs last year between the Patriots and the current 0-3 Ravens (yeah, dig intended!), where they whined because the Patriots called off some guy they called eligible and replaced him with some other DB that was thus made 'under the radar eligible, ...effectively duping the other team's coach ...yadda yadda yadda, bounce ahead to the next season and I think the League imposed a new rule. 

 

heh, every year the League has to come up with a new rule to keep up with Bellicheck's deviant talent in finding loop-holds. 

 

But anyway, maybe back whence it wasn't as readily known that always picking C -- I read a study on it actually, and they found that it did enhance random guess percentages.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw this brought up as well. Take a look out west. You have a s/w trough diving south and helping to slow or pull the trough west, out near the Pacific coast at hr 60. If that happens, then ridging over the Plains may develop and possibly slow down the cutoff trough over the SE that helps capture Joaquin. I mean talk about a complicated series of interactions.

Not far fetched to think that the EURO is handling the west CONUS better...how often do we see that during the winter.

 

My "outlandish OTS call from yesterday may yet verify. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok. This is kind of what I suspected myself.

I just wasn't sure if their decision making was ever done that way.

Interesting

 

Aahhhyeaah... I wouldn't run with that to the bank as policy - haha.

 

I was being partial tongue in cheek there.   

 

Although the hidden point is clad, in that I don't think they really know.  It may be coincidence they chose those previous track guidance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ha ha, probably because of that reason -

 

I was in college back before the turn of the Century... you know, when dino's roamed?

 

It was a fresh and new sort of 'not really' cheating > 50% of all students engaged in... kind of like that play in the Playoffs last year between the Patriots and the current 0-3 Ravens (yeah, dig intended!), where they whined because the Patriots called off some guy they called eligible and replaced him with some other DB that was thus made 'under the radar eligible, ...effectively duping the other team's coach ...yadda yadda yadda, bounce ahead to the next season and I think the League imposed a new rule. 

 

heh, every year the League has to come up with a new rule to keep up with Bellicheck's deviant talent in finding loop-holds. 

 

But anyway, maybe back whence it wasn't as readily known that always picking C -- I read a study on it actually, and they found that it did enhance random guess percentages.  

 

I wish to learn more about loop-holds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...