Dr Gray Upgrades numbers =13/7/3

[MWatkins]

Dr. Gray has a batting average of 44.2% since 1992. What, exactly do his predictions mean?

Not sure how you are calculating that number...so 44.2% has little to no concrete meaning. What about Dr Gray's forecast was 44%? The number of times he's hit the named storm total exactly? If that is the case, 44% is OUTSTANDING.

I would venture to bet that Dr Gray's forecasts verify out better than just predicting the climatological average every year, which would make his forecast skillful by any scientific standard.

MW

[Scorpion]

Most of the times his predictions are lower than the actual results.

[MWatkins]

Most of the times his predictions are lower than the actual results.

Since 1995.

The mutidecadal shift has altered the numbers some...and since the bulk of the reliable data has been developed in the last 25/30 years...I would expect that the #'s should be on the low side of the expected range.

Again...until someone can show that Dr Gray's numbers are not skillful against climatology...there is no argument about these forecasts being skillfull.

MW

[StormChasr]

I posted that humorous article in coralsprings.com a week ago that charted Dr. Gray's predictions, and showed that he was less than skillful. Nobody took it seriously, but I would be glad to post it again. If Dr. Gray were paid on an accountability basis, he'd be in trouble, as his forecasting skill is less than 50%, and in most areas of competence, that would be viewed as failing.

[Skywatch_NC]

I thought S2K has a policy against talking negative towards the NWS, SPC, NHC, etc.--shouldn't that also include towards Dr. William Gray?

Eric

[StormChasr]

I thought S2K has a policy against talking negative towards the NWS, SPC, NHC, etc.--shouldn't that also include towards Dr. William Gray?

Please don't get me wrong--I am not being NEGATIVE. I am just presenting differing opinions as to the STATISTICAL VERACITY of predictions. If you're offended, I apologize--my background is in statistical analysis, and as such, I am very skeptical of predictive data analysis, as I know the potential for manipulation of data to prove one's point--whether this manipulation is intentional or subliminal, that isn't the issue. One can prove whatever one wants, using numbers.

One of my favorite TV shows is "Numbers," on Friday night. Charlie, the mathematician, is very interesting, and points to how computational analysis can be used to solve cases ( and in some situations, it can prejudice the outcome of an analysis). That is merely my point, and if I have offended anybody, I will pick up my marbles and go home. That was not my intention---I live in Daytona Beach, and get frustrated when people with a very limited background in math make predictions that may be so far from verification, they don't even comprehend that aspect.

Besides, Dr. Gray has made himself a public figure, and isn't criticism (as long as it is POLITE criticism) totally appropriate and in the interest of presenting all sides of an issue?

[MWatkins]

I thought S2K has a policy against talking negative towards the NWS, SPC, NHC, etc.--shouldn't that also include towards Dr. William Gray?

Please don't get me wrong--I am not being NEGATIVE. I am just presenting differing opinions as to the STATISTICAL VERACITY of predictions. If you're offended, I apologize--my background is in statistical analysis, and as such, I am very skeptical of predictive data analysis, as I know the potential for manipulation of data to prove one's point--whether this manipulation is intentional or subliminal, that isn't the issue. One can prove whatever one wants, using numbers.

One of my favorite TV shows is "Numbers," on Friday night. Charlie, the mathematician, is very interesting, and points to how computational analysis can be used to solve cases ( and in some situations, it can prejudice the outcome of an analysis). That is merely my point, and if I have offended anybody, I will pick up my marbles and go home. That was not my intention---I live in Daytona Beach, and get frustrated when people with a very limited background in math make predictions that may be so far from verification, they don't even comprehend that aspect.

Besides, Dr. Gray has made himself a public figure, and isn't criticism (as long as it is POLITE criticism) totally appropriate and in the interest of presenting all sides of an issue?

Not offended at all...just wondering what you are measuring when you calulated 44%

MW

[StormChasr]

http://coralsprings.com/article1/myth_of_weather_forecasting2.htm

If you take this chart, and add 2004's prediction, when Dr. Gray predicted 8 hurricanes, and there were 9, it would decrease the average deviation from the norm to 44.2%. Now, I don't know how vaid this is, but technically, Dr. Gray hasn't been too accurate STATISTICALLY with the number of hurricanes predicted. Maybe in terms of Met. accuracty that is viewed as "good," but the general public would probably disagree. If one were to use the number of "Intense Hurricanes," I am sure a similar pattern would emerge. I am not saying that I agree with the author, but it does raise the obvious problem with hurricane prognostication. MY calculations indicate that one can determine the number of A) named storms, B) Hurricanes and C) Intense (CAT 3,4,5) hurricanes LESS than 50% of the time with any accuracy--to me, as a numbers freak, that isn't a good batting average.

[drdoom]

His predictions seem like college preseason football ratings, based on the previous years performance. To try and guess numbers and strike probabilities is a coin flip. Having that feeling of shock when realizing Charley was an hour away is something I'll never forget. I used to get upset year after year when we would be spared time after time. Now I'm not so sure I want my car, house and personal saftey put in harms way for front row mother nature entertainment!!

[Stephanie]

Interesting... a few weeks ago I predicted 13/7/3... hmmmm

http://www.storm2k.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=59313



It shall be an interesting season. Let's hope it's a safe one.

I went with 14/7/3. I hope that the majors stay out to sea however.

[StormChasr]

His predictions seem like college preseason football ratings, based on the previous years performance.

Tell me about it--I am a mathematician, and the only one I got right in the brackets was North Carolina.