Hi Roger,

I don't really understand this process of evaluation and I rather have a different idea about how one should look at evaluating this prediction and others as well.

Don's forecast was for Santa Rosa and he gave a 35km range. Inasmuch as it did hit in Santa Rosa and very close to the epicenter he predicted why would one have to include the entire 35km radius when making an evaluation after the earthquake occurs?

I could see using pre-event background rates as one would not know where the quake was going to arrive, but once it does arrive, then I think only using the radius of km's from the predicted epicenter to the distance where the quake occurred would be the correct way of making a valid assessment.

Just as an example:

Jane says a quake will occur in Bohica and provides a 10km radius. It occurs 3km from the expected location. So in the final analysis one should be using the background rate of 3km, rather than 10km.

Don's quake did not happen at the Geysers, but in Santa Rosa where he said it was going to happen, so he's much closer to the forecast when you look at the actual results.

What do you think?

Petra