Come to think of it, why are we discussing points anyway? That's part of evaluation.

All we need to do is say hit or miss, and if a miss, list the best-fitting quake(s) according to whatever standards we can agree on.

So a hit is when a quake fits all the predicted parameters and if it's a miss, we list the best fitting quakes. The audience can decide for themselves on near-miss credit.

What say, all?

Roger