What Happened to JB on Dennis?

[micktooth]

Hi y'all, I've been lurking for a long time but I finally had to post. Thanks for all of the useful info.
Why was JB so adamant on the mouth of the river and a New Orleans hit? All the obvious signs pointed to the east of NO. Did I miss something? It's almost like he "wanted" it to hit close to NO so he could do the " I told you so thing". Any opinions on why he stuck to his forecast so late in the game?

Dave

[StormWarning1]

He tends to try and nail landfall way to early. Once he makes a forecast for landfall he does not waver off of it. Prefers to go down with the ship than flip flop all over the basin.

[Rainband]

He tends to try and nail landfall way to early. Once he makes a forecast for landfall he does not waver off of it. Prefers to go down with the ship than flip flop all over the basin.

agreed

[Agua]

He tends to try and nail landfall way to early. Once he makes a forecast for landfall he does not waver off of it. Prefers to go down with the ship than flip flop all over the basin.

Yeah, he says that he changed his landfall forecast last year with Ivan when the models were making a shift towards FL and that he kicks himself now from backing away with his original prediction (which I don't think was Gulf Shores or Pennsacola, but a lot closer than penninsular FL). In the midst of his giving huge props to NHC today, he admitted that as it looked increasingly like his landfall wasn't going to verify, he ended up trying look for reasons that it would rather than look at what was going on.

I've said it before and I believe it's pretty accurate. He's very, very, very good at recognizing likely development and where it will occur. He tries to hit a landfall area too far out in advance and isn't real hot on that.

I've noticed even among our own mets here, some are really, really good at recognizing development, while others' forte' is predicting landfall tracks. They're apparently different skill sets.

[Radar]

IT is for dramatic effect... Just imagine if he had been right and the NHC had kept their track over the Panhandle and Mobile... Just imagine what that would do for JB's career. It is a big gamble JB is undertaking but I guess to him it is worth it.

[Derecho]

I've said it before and I believe it's pretty accurate. He's very, very, very good at recognizing likely development and where it will occur.

If you forecast development every two days in the most climatologically favorable areas, you can't miss forecasting development.

He writes a long rambling discussion every day and proclaims every wave "possible tropical trouble in a (a few days/next week)." Some of those waves do develop eventually. It continues to astonish me that people perceive this as some sort of uncanny skill.

If he's so great at recognizing likely development why did he forecast development 26 times last year in June and July before the first actual storm developed?

[MetroMike]

I noticed in his video today he was wearing a coat and tie...Perhaps to help his ego after the blown forecast?

[corpusbreeze]

He tends to try and nail landfall way to early. Once he makes a forecast for landfall he does not waver off of it. Prefers to go down with the ship than flip flop all over the basin.

He does. He should let a little more time go by before nailing down an area. But he is worth paying attention to, he does have some good points.

[djtil]

he does have some good points.

very debatable.

[Huckster]

I've said it before and I believe it's pretty accurate. He's very, very, very good at recognizing likely development and where it will occur.

If you forecast development every two days in the most climatologically favorable areas, you can't miss forecasting development.

He writes a long rambling discussion every day and proclaims every wave "possible tropical trouble in a (a few days/next week)." Some of those waves do develop eventually. It continues to astonish me that people perceive this as some sort of uncanny skill.

If he's so great at recognizing likely development why did he forecast development 26 times last year in June and July before the first actual storm developed?

I know I might incur your foaming-at-the-mouth wrath for being so stupid for asking you this (and you will want to call me a "fan boy"), but where exactly are you getting this 26 times number? I've read his columns and watched his videos last season as well as this season, and I simply do not recall him actually forecasting development 26 times. Highlighting possible developments is not the same thing as forecasting developments, and you know that as does any other weather savvy individual. I don't think you're making a distinction here, and if you completely generalize all statements about development as being forecasts for development and maybe count one statement about "possible development" mentioned in his column and in his video as being two different "forecasts", then your 26 times figure might be right.

For the three most recent systems of interest this year, this is basically what I remember him saying. For the wave that became Brett, he said there COULD be possible development (as did others). He did not say "I forecast this to develop", at least as best as I can remember. For the wave that became Cindy, he positively, definitely, absolutely made a forecast for development and even named Texas or Louisiana as the area he was forecasting to be struck. I believe that was on the Thursday or Friday before it was named. He didn't simply say, "Possible trouble." He was very unambiguous about that wave. He absolutely forecasted development for the wave that became Dennis and irresponsibly forecasted it to hit Louisiana as a cat. 3 hurricane, a forecast he stuck with far too long. He was guilty of hyping up a Louisiana hit and possible New Orleans direct hit. On a side note here, there was one forecast by him for the storm to hit Louisiana. I wonder how many separate "forecasts" I could make out of that if I counted every time Louisiana was mentioned. Certainly, there'd be more than one based on that way of thinking, but is that intellectually honest? Again, I'd like to know your method behind the 26 times figure. Do you consider statements like "possible trouble next week after a trough split" and "my forecast or best guess is for this wave in the northwest Caribbean to go ahead and develop into a strong tropical storm or minimal hurricane and hit TX/LA" the same? Are those really just different ways of saying the exact same thing? If that's how I thought, or if that's how most people interpreted that, or he meant the same thing by those two different statements, then nothing in this world would make a lick of sense because there'd be no difference between what he says and what any amateur whose been studying the weather for three days says, and I highly doubt anyone would think he had some "uncanny skill." Lutherans end up with two sacraments, Roman Catolics seven, and Baptists zero simply on the basis of how they define the word sacrament, so it's important to make sure we're all on the same page in how we're using words.

I don't want to make this personal, since you haven't attacked me for anything, and I am not really trying to attack you either. I am just trying to get some facts and figures involved here and see terminology clarified and defined. That should make everyone happy, right? However, it's my perception that you've said you don't have a whole lot of time to post on here and give forecasts of your own. Of course, that makes it impossible for you to give a wrong forecast yourself, but it also makes me wonder where you get time to so carefully read Bastardi's stuff so in depth that you can count all his forecasts and keep these stats on hand (or in mind). If Bastardi's "forecasts" are so completely useless and wrong and stupid, etc., and since this is basically an axiom in your mind, I think we'd all benefit from seeing something positive in the way of a forecast come from you rather than this constant stream of venom. You'd benefit since you'd be making something constructive instead of reading a bunch of useless drivel.

Now, I know there could be a tendency for this discussion to turn into another dialogue about the whole NOAA vs. Accuweather/Santorum deal, but that's been sufficiently dealt with earlier and elsewhere. I am not trying to defend the non-sense promulgated by Accuweather in that regard, and I disagree with them. I am just trying to make sure that there's something more to this argument than "I hate Bastardi because he's an incompetent idiot, and I've never read anything he's written, but others don't like him and I won't either" and "Bastardi is the king of weather forecasting of all kinds and he's never wrong. His detractors just want you do think that because they're jealous." I don't mind a couple of insults, but let's keep it basically civil.

[Steve]

Intersting post Huckster. I don't remember the columns from last year, so I can't debunk or corroborate (sp?) what Derecho put out there. I'll wait for him to respond on his own.

Steve

[jax]

He tends to try and nail landfall way to early. Once he makes a forecast for landfall he does not waver off of it. Prefers to go down with the ship than flip flop all over the basin.

to be fair... to suggest a landfall 3000 mile out... and only miss the line
by .001 degrees... Outstanding... and to take it a step further... he
mentioned back in early June that the area between NO and Destin
would be hit HARD this year... he kinda called the track DEAD ON a
full month in advance.... Give the guy his due!

[djtil]

to be fair... to suggest a landfall 3000 mile out... and only miss the line
by .001 degrees... Outstanding

lol...i love the apologists.

the storm was only a few hundred miles out when the nut was still insisting on his new orleans to denver scenario.

anyone who gives this guy airtime is an irresponsible media source. period.

[Steve]

>>djtil

Took me a while to figure out what your alias was. Damn I was slow.

Steve

[jax]

to be fair... to suggest a landfall 3000 mile out... and only miss the line
by .001 degrees... Outstanding

lol...i love the apologists.

the storm was only a few hundred miles out when the nut was still insisting on his new orleans to denver scenario.

anyone who gives this guy airtime is an irresponsible media source. period.

you gotta give him credit... it doesn't flip flop...

[Comanche]

Great post huckster! u can't fault JB for the endgame miss of such a minute amount when he forecast things that are a week out or further and usually beats the models handsdown on long range. i gladly send in my dues each month.

[N2Storms]

Personally I really like JB, but he does seem "hell bent" on trying to one up the NHC. It seems as though his forecasts never plumb with the official forecast. I wonder if that is why FOX didn't have him on Fri night after featuring him Wed and Thurs when he was predicting a landfall well West of the official NHC track. They had Max Mayfield on instead of JB that night. I enjoy him, but not enough to pay $$$ for his daily forecasts.

[mitchell]

pretty cool how mayfield showed his hand as early as 8 p.m. on Fox that they would begin issuing advisories on TD 5 at 11 p.m. JB can't match THAT!