Odd, that's what I've always said too. What I do better than others is to interpret the models to say what they are likely to be correct at any one time. (That's what you've never said, but is what actually happens).

No, I've always said that it is you interpreting the models, not you making the forecast. It is the models forecasting not you.
Whist Will may be "hopecasting" (in your opinion) what he is brave enough to do is actually forecast and not be afraid to get it wrong.
Getting things wrong is one of the best ways to learn by analysing what went wrong and applying those learnings in the future.
Watching others forecasts and only being able to "forecast" when they show consistency is lacking in skill and confidence in those skills.
If you were brave enough to forecast when there's inconsistency in the models, then you'd have my respect, even if you get it wrong more often than not.
How are you better at interpreting the models when you only "forecast" when there's consistency?
How are you better than anyone else at this?
If I had the time I'd love to match your record (it's not difficult) by issuing my own, but I have a life outside this group and many other interests that all demand time.
But, if I did have the time, I wouldn't do that anyway, I'd rather test my own interpretations on a daily basis to see how successful I could be and not be afraid of getting it wrong.