Hi Roger,

I didn't think so. Even with a track record, I still do not understand that whole concept. Do you?

Maybe it is similar to predictions of rain. 80% change of rain, 20% change of no rain. If it rains you're right, if it doesn't rain you also right. I can't think of anyway to evaluate whether your 80% prediction of rain was correct or not. I'm sure it has some basis, but I just can't verbalize my thoughts, and I certainly can't think of how that concept would extend to predicting earthquakes ...

I remember this idea being explained to me this way: At any given moment in the forcast period, 80% of the forcast area will be getting rained on, and 20% of the area will not be getting rained on. If that were the case, then I suppose somebody who was really bored could analze the % predicted and come up with a usefull conclusion ... ie, at the peak rainfall of the forcast period, 73% of the area was being rained on, so the prediction was off by whatever percent etc ...

Michael