Firstly, it wasn't a formal prediction so it shouldn't be evaluated.

Secondly, it was to be pretty much of a straight line.

Thirdly, I wasn't claiming a hit and was posting about what one of the problems are with my process.

This makes you a jerk by your response.

Lastly, I've been doing this for far longer then you've been dry behind the ears. I know what a well defined prediction is.

Second lastly, trying to achieve a statistically significant result is a waste of time because the scientific community ignores it WHICH I'VE ALREADY PROVEN THRU MY PAST EXPERIENCE. This is the reason for my not being specific and this is the reason why I am not (and will not) use the form that Canie put together so efficiently.

All I am doing is playing the generalized weather (quake) forecaster. If you don't like it, go somewhere else. If you don't like it and continue to post your useless comments, you can expect that we will continue to go round and round.

Now be the nice jerk and go home to momma.

Dennis