Good morning Col.

Your point has been well taken here. And I agree with what you say. The forecast was in no way reliable. A good case for gloating on your part would only
have been fair. I was also in two minds whether to post your posting, as arranged, or leave it. Due to spring cleaning this weekend I've only now got back to
the forecast.

For some time I've been watching the results of previous forecasts and not been pleased with the outcome. The problem was the periods of stagnation due to
blocking situations. My forecasting method worked on the continued movement of day-to-day pressure situations. When a blocking occurred and stagnation set
in, my forecast didn't see it and continued merrily turning out day-to-day movements. I've been working on changes in the routine for some time and came up
with two systems which (I think) have solved the blocking problem. Naturally, I want the better of the two systems to show itself by experience. And that's
what I'm doing at the moment. Two forecasts of the daily charts have been running since the end of last month and I hope to have the new routine going
towards the end of April.

So Col, if you don't mind, I would like to redeem anything I might have had, by doing a new forecast with a similar type of support information. Perhaps
you could suggest a date and give me a chance to gloat.

Thanks for the interest, Col.

Cheers, Keith
PS. Don't know what happened to my previous posting. Lines must have got crossed.


Col schrieb:

I hesitated in posting this because I didn't want it to look like
I was gloating:

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...lington&rnum=1

With regard to the Royal Wedding taking place yesterday (!)
You predicted warm southerlies, but in fact it was the opposite
with cold northerlies.

You live and learn, I guess

If there is any merit to your methods, I hope you find it.

Col
--
Bolton, Lancashire.
160m asl.
http://www.reddwarfer.btinternet.co.uk
http://www.reddwarfer.btinternet.co....rPictures.html

Good morning Col.

Your point has been well taken here. And I agree with what you say. The forecast was in no way reliable. A good case for gloating on your part would only
have been fair. I was also in two minds whether to post your posting, as arranged, or leave it. Due to spring cleaning this weekend I've only now got back to
the forecast.

For some time I've been watching the results of previous forecasts and not been pleased with the outcome. The problem was the periods of stagnation due to
blocking situations. My forecasting method worked on the continued movement of day-to-day pressure situations. When a blocking occurred and stagnation set
in, my forecast didn't see it and continued merrily turning out day-to-day movements. I've been working on changes in the routine for some time and came up
with two systems which (I think) have solved the blocking problem. Naturally, I want the better of the two systems to show itself by experience. And that's
what I'm doing at the moment. Two forecasts of the daily charts have been running since the end of last month and I hope to have the new routine going
towards the end of April.

So Col, if you don't mind, I would like to redeem anything I might have had, by doing a new forecast with a similar type of support information. Perhaps
you could suggest a date and give me a chance to gloat.

Thanks for the interest, Col.

Cheers, Keith
PS. Don't know what happened to my previous posting. Lines must have got crossed.


Col schrieb:

I hesitated in posting this because I didn't want it to look like
I was gloating:

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...lington&rnum=1

With regard to the Royal Wedding taking place yesterday (!)
You predicted warm southerlies, but in fact it was the opposite
with cold northerlies.

You live and learn, I guess

If there is any merit to your methods, I hope you find it.

Col
--
Bolton, Lancashire.
160m asl.
http://www.reddwarfer.btinternet.co.uk
http://www.reddwarfer.btinternet.co....rPictures.html

Good morning Col.

Your point has been well taken here. And I agree with what you say. The forecast was in no way reliable. A good case for gloating on your part would only
have been fair. I was also in two minds whether to post your posting, as arranged, or leave it. Due to spring cleaning this weekend I've only now got back to
the forecast.

For some time I've been watching the results of previous forecasts and not been pleased with the outcome. The problem was the periods of stagnation due to
blocking situations. My forecasting method worked on the continued movement of day-to-day pressure situations. When a blocking occurred and stagnation set
in, my forecast didn't see it and continued merrily turning out day-to-day movements. I've been working on changes in the routine for some time and came up
with two systems which (I think) have solved the blocking problem. Naturally, I want the better of the two systems to show itself by experience. And that's
what I'm doing at the moment. Two forecasts of the daily charts have been running since the end of last month and I hope to have the new routine going
towards the end of April.

So Col, if you don't mind, I would like to redeem anything I might have had, by doing a new forecast with a similar type of support information. Perhaps
you could suggest a date and give me a chance to gloat.

Thanks for the interest, Col.

Cheers, Keith
PS. Don't know what happened to my previous posting. Lines must have got crossed.


Col schrieb:

I hesitated in posting this because I didn't want it to look like
I was gloating:

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...lington&rnum=1

With regard to the Royal Wedding taking place yesterday (!)
You predicted warm southerlies, but in fact it was the opposite
with cold northerlies.

You live and learn, I guess

If there is any merit to your methods, I hope you find it.

Col
--
Bolton, Lancashire.
160m asl.
http://www.reddwarfer.btinternet.co.uk
http://www.reddwarfer.btinternet.co....rPictures.html

Why not try running the program in reverse, and see if you can identify
some of the weather events that have occurred recently ;-)

Why not try running the program in reverse, and see if you can identify
some of the weather events that have occurred recently ;-)

Why not try running the program in reverse, and see if you can identify
some of the weather events that have occurred recently ;-)

Why not try running the program in reverse, and see if you can identify
some of the weather events that have occurred recently ;-)

"Keith Darlington" wrote in message
...
Good morning Col.
Your point has been well taken here. And I agree with what you say. The
forecast was in no way reliable. A good case for gloating on your part would
only have been fair. I was also in two minds whether to post your posting, as
arranged, or leave it. Due to spring cleaning this weekend I've only now got
back to the forecast.

Since I wouldn't have a clue as to how to even *start* preparing a forecast,
I don't really consider it appropriate for me to gloat

For some time I've been watching the results of previous forecasts and not been
pleased with the outcome. The problem was the periods of stagnation due to
blocking situations. My forecasting method worked on the continued movement of
day-to-day pressure situations. When a blocking occurred and stagnation set
in, my forecast didn't see it and continued merrily turning out day-to-day
movements. I've been working on changes in the routine for some time and came
up with two systems which (I think) have solved the blocking problem.
Naturally, I want the better of the two systems to show itself by experience.
And that's what I'm doing at the moment. Two forecasts of the daily charts
have been running since the end of last month and I hope to have the new routine
going towards the end of April.
So Col, if you don't mind, I would like to redeem anything I might have had,
by doing a new forecast with a similar type of support information. Perhaps
you could suggest a date and give me a chance to gloat.

OK this is the obvious choice, how about election day, May 5th?

I know it's not as far ahead as the other prediction but still way beyond
the point at which I would consider such a detailed forecast to be feasible.

Good luck!

Col
--
Bolton, Lancashire.
160m asl.
http://www.reddwarfer.btinternet.co.uk
http://www.reddwarfer.btinternet.co....rPictures.html

"Keith Darlington" wrote in message
...
Good morning Col.
Your point has been well taken here. And I agree with what you say. The
forecast was in no way reliable. A good case for gloating on your part would
only have been fair. I was also in two minds whether to post your posting, as
arranged, or leave it. Due to spring cleaning this weekend I've only now got
back to the forecast.

Since I wouldn't have a clue as to how to even *start* preparing a forecast,
I don't really consider it appropriate for me to gloat

For some time I've been watching the results of previous forecasts and not been
pleased with the outcome. The problem was the periods of stagnation due to
blocking situations. My forecasting method worked on the continued movement of
day-to-day pressure situations. When a blocking occurred and stagnation set
in, my forecast didn't see it and continued merrily turning out day-to-day
movements. I've been working on changes in the routine for some time and came
up with two systems which (I think) have solved the blocking problem.
Naturally, I want the better of the two systems to show itself by experience.
And that's what I'm doing at the moment. Two forecasts of the daily charts
have been running since the end of last month and I hope to have the new routine
going towards the end of April.
So Col, if you don't mind, I would like to redeem anything I might have had,
by doing a new forecast with a similar type of support information. Perhaps
you could suggest a date and give me a chance to gloat.

OK this is the obvious choice, how about election day, May 5th?

I know it's not as far ahead as the other prediction but still way beyond
the point at which I would consider such a detailed forecast to be feasible.

Good luck!

Col
--
Bolton, Lancashire.
160m asl.
http://www.reddwarfer.btinternet.co.uk
http://www.reddwarfer.btinternet.co....rPictures.html

"Keith Darlington" wrote in message
...
Good morning Col.
Your point has been well taken here. And I agree with what you say. The
forecast was in no way reliable. A good case for gloating on your part would
only have been fair. I was also in two minds whether to post your posting, as
arranged, or leave it. Due to spring cleaning this weekend I've only now got
back to the forecast.

Since I wouldn't have a clue as to how to even *start* preparing a forecast,
I don't really consider it appropriate for me to gloat

For some time I've been watching the results of previous forecasts and not been
pleased with the outcome. The problem was the periods of stagnation due to
blocking situations. My forecasting method worked on the continued movement of
day-to-day pressure situations. When a blocking occurred and stagnation set
in, my forecast didn't see it and continued merrily turning out day-to-day
movements. I've been working on changes in the routine for some time and came
up with two systems which (I think) have solved the blocking problem.
Naturally, I want the better of the two systems to show itself by experience.
And that's what I'm doing at the moment. Two forecasts of the daily charts
have been running since the end of last month and I hope to have the new routine
going towards the end of April.
So Col, if you don't mind, I would like to redeem anything I might have had,
by doing a new forecast with a similar type of support information. Perhaps
you could suggest a date and give me a chance to gloat.

OK this is the obvious choice, how about election day, May 5th?

I know it's not as far ahead as the other prediction but still way beyond
the point at which I would consider such a detailed forecast to be feasible.

Good luck!

Col
--
Bolton, Lancashire.
160m asl.
http://www.reddwarfer.btinternet.co.uk
http://www.reddwarfer.btinternet.co....rPictures.html