Hi Mary:

I hear what your saying, but I disagree with one hit being "more of a hit" than some other hit. IMHO, a hit is a hit is a hit. It either is or it isn't. The one thing I do need to do is add a column for Random Chance, in other words what the odds were for a random hit given the parameters of a prediction. The credibility of a predictor is not going to be earned with one or two predictions, but will be earned by the ability of the predictor to repeatedly outperform random chance.

I honestly feel that near hit/near miss/whatever arguement will be a moot point over the history of a predictor. If the predictor makes predictions that cover too broad of an area, time, or mag., chances are they will get a hit. But when that hit is compared against say a 95% chance of occurance by random chance, it will proven to be a usless hit. On the other hand, if a predictor makes very narrow predictions, and gets hits against a 15% random chance, then they're going to perk up my ears because that shows to me that they are on to something.

I don't believe in near hits, but many on this board do and I respect their opinions. If the near hit enthusiasts can come up with a solution to define what a near hit, I'd be most happy to add to the status table to support them, but so far, that endeavour has proven to be easier said than done.

Michael