we're talking radius.

His predicted area is a circle 2 degrees in radius about a given point. But he wants partial credit for things outside the bullseye.

He wants 90% for something no more than 10% of the radius, 80% below 20% outside, etc. etc.

I say it's too much credit because the area is not a linear function of the radius.

I further contend that the increase in area is itself too small a measure ; that a ring between 140 and 156 miles in radius has a higher probability than a circle of equal area because it covers such a wide range of locations.

Roger