Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,502
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    Weathernoob335
    Newest Member
    Weathernoob335
    Joined

January 2021


40/70 Benchmark
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

That one fails, I'll give it one more before calling fail on the Jan 2011 talk.

You already said you’re not on the January 2011 train.  So I don’t get the meaning of your post?  
Unless you are meaning that talk from others?   
 

Jan 2011 and feb 2015 aren’t predictable...they just happen with a good pattern and some great timing/and fortune.   

  • Weenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, WinterWolf said:

You already said you’re not on the January 2011 train.  So I don’t get the meaning of your post?  
 

Jan 2011 and feb 2015 aren’t predictable...they just happen with a good pattern and some great timing/and fortune.   

I can contain confirmation that it is not happening...I'm not sure what confused you?

They are predictable....if it doesn't work out, then those are the breaks.

I predicted 2015 and 2018 both....called the Jan 2016 blizzard, too, but problem was I thought it would get NE more than it did.

Those are the breaks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

I can contain confirmation that it is not happening...I'm not sure what confused you?

They are predictable....if it doesn't work out, then those are the breaks.

Nobody predicted feb 15 or January 11 in advance. We can say the pattern setting up was looking very good, and it would be very active with Chances. But nobody could have predicted that ‘11 and ‘15 would have ended up like they did.  If the Chances all hit...then that’s what happens.  But nobody knows that specific outcome a month in advance is my point. 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, WinterWolf said:

Nobody predicted feb 15 or January 11 in advance. We can say the pattern setting up was looking very good, and it would be very active with Chances. But nobody could have predicted that ‘11 and ‘15 would have ended up like they did.  If the Chances all hit...then that’s what happens.  But nobody knows that specific outcome a month in advance is my point. 
 

 

I did....would you like to see the post?

Not quite to that degree, but it was about as descriptive as you can get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last two seasons have been awful for me, and I am the first to say it. But I sure as hell nailed 2014-2015 and 2017-2018.

I will grant you that my totals were a bit low, and I forecast the Atlantic to be the main driver of 2015, but it was the Pacific....that was all detailed in the post analysis.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

I did....would you like to see the post?

Not quite to that degree, but it was about as descriptive as you can get.

I’m not trying to bust yours or anybody’s chops, I’m just saying, that sure we can say the pattern is setting up very nicely, and the pattern is looking epic etc etc etc.... and all the ingredients are there.  But to say a record breaking 3.5 weeks is coming with 100 plus inches of snow, is not predictable 3-4 weeks out imo, prior to the barrage of storms setting in.   Cuz if one or two storms miss due to a nuance here or there, the 100 inch record breaker of 15,  and January of 11 is not going to happen.   
 

I guess that’s my point . 
 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, WinterWolf said:

I’m not trying to bust yours or anybody’s chops, I’m just saying, that sure we can say the pattern is setting up very nicely, and the pattern is looking epic etc etc etc.... and all the ingredients are there.  But to say a record breaking 3.5 weeks is coming with 100 plus inches of snow, is not predictable 3-4 weeks out imo, prior to the barrage of storms setting in.   Cuz if one or two storms miss due to a nuance here or there, the 100 inch record breaker of 15 and 11 is not going to happen.   
 

I guess that’s my point . 
 

 

Technically, no, but I came about as close you can get.

Read it. I didn't have the technical prowess that I have now, as that was my initial foray into seasonal forecasting, but I explained why I thought that season would turn ferocious after a quiet first half.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 40/70 Benchmark said:

Technically, no, but I came about as close you can get.

Read it. I didn't have the technical prowess that I have now, as that was my initial foray into seasonal forecasting, but I explained why I thought that season would turn ferocious after a quiet first half.

It was a great call..nice job.  Things lined up perfectly.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is always the chance of an outlook being great, but one storm missing due to a nuance...those are the breaks. It also happens in sports, and life in general. Those are the breaks that distinguish victory from the jaws of defeat.....all you can do is try to place yourself in the best possible position, and hope to get lucky enough to avail of your work.

That happened to me in 2016 with the mid atlantic blizzard....great call and everything from a seasonal level, but because it whiffed New England totally, my seasonal totals were way off up here.

Those are the breaks, and you need to understand that....so I'm not sure why the need to endlessly adding that qualifier.

We all know this....its implicit. 

I think in the end, there will definitely be value in the big January calls because I think the NAO is going to come to fruition....I think we will all understand the value of the contributions of those like Cosgrove and Steve, who went big in January. @Isotherm did, too....so some good company there.

I had an okay January overall, but was struggling with when the pattern went to crap, which I still think that it will...looks to hold off until Feb, though.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, WinterWolf said:

I understand perfectly.
Thanks.  
 

BTW, Blizzard of 16 didn’t completely whiff SNE.  CT shore did quite well with a foot plus, and inland areas such as where I live got 8-10”.  Just north of here it dropped off a cliff though.   
 

 

Not all, but it whiffed alot of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Such an interesting look on the GFS. It looks like the remains of our "storm" today eject a pinball s/w which dives through Ontario as mjo781 mentioned. I think that even if that s/w wasn't there, there still would exist too much traffic upstream (or downstream?) in the PAC, which prevents a strong ridge from popping out west, which would itself cause the s/w to dig more and therefore, turn up the coast sooner. Also allows for potential northern stream interaction, stealing the snow from our mid-atlantic neighbors once again.

Is a block over Labrador really THAT much worse than a block over Davis Strait?

gfs_z500a_namer_fh84-126.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I understand why this happens (referring to the s/w in Ontario):

Two areas of HP merge near Labrador, "squishing" a portion of that 50/50 low down south. I finally understand what @Typhoon Tip meant. I actually suggested this in my long post a few days ago, but back when today's event was progged to strengthen, it kind of rammed the higher heights northward, towards more favorable places. Another consequence of that scenario would've been no Ontario s/w, because the H5 energy of the cyclone would be more tightly wound (again, the new term isohypse can be used here) and thus, no stragglers to be squeezed off the main low pressure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Wentzadelphia said:

We all know you’ll be on the first flight back if a big one is coming 

Not possible.  We’re driving and for urgent family business.  I’ve missed plenty of them but it can also snow in Chicago as well as the entire LES belt we need to drive through going and coming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WinterWolf said:

I understand perfectly.
Thanks.  
 

BTW, Blizzard of 16 didn’t completely whiff SNE.  CT shore did quite well with a foot plus, and inland areas such as where I live got 8-10”.  Just north of here it dropped off a cliff though.   
 

 

I was working in Bridgeport at the time and they got slammed while we got like a quarter of their total.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Henry's Weather said:

I think I understand why this happens (referring to the s/w in Ontario):

Two areas of HP merge near Labrador, "squishing" a portion of that 50/50 low down south. I finally understand what @Typhoon Tip meant. I actually suggested this in my long post a few days ago, but back when today's event was progged to strengthen, it kind of rammed the higher heights northward, towards more favorable places. Another consequence of that scenario would've been no Ontario s/w, because the H5 energy of the cyclone would be more tightly wound (again, the new term isohypse can be used here) and thus, no stragglers to be squeezed off the main low pressure.

First half of January may well be a wash, at this point. I know the great pattern was always mid month, but you hope to catch a break beforehand, and it doesn't look like we will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Next weekend looks tenuous at best, probably a whiff.  Really need to get beyond mid-month to see a more favorable set-up for storm chances.  It certainly looks like January is going to come in AN in the temp department unless we get some anomalous cold towards the end of the month.   The next week looks boring, hopefully get some sunshine out this way to soften the ice pack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...