I had suggested scaling the tornado count error by the spread of trend-adjusted annual tornado reports, which, as I reported a few posts back, is 203. Thus, take the absolute value of the tornado count error and divide by 203. From that value, add 1.0 if the person was wrong about whether or not there would be a high risk, and add 0.0 if the person was right about it. Lowest score wins.
Usage:
Suppose "no high risk" verifies. Under this scoring method, it's not guaranteed that someone who went with "no high risk" would win. If the tornado count ends up significantly increasing to the point where the person who went with "no high risk" who was closest on tornado count (among all who forecasted "no high risk") ended up off by more than 203 tornadoes than someone who went with a high risk, then the person with the closer tornado count who did go with a high risk would end up with a lower score than the person who went with "no high risk".
Example:
Say "no high risk" verifies and the tornado count is 1450. Say person A says "no high risk" and 1000 tornadoes; person B says "high risk on XXX day" and 1400 tornadoes. In this case, person B would end up with a lower score than person A.
Bottom line:
This scoring method unfortunately does not account for how to differentiate between people with different days of "first high risk" in the event that "no high risk" verifies. However, given the current values, I don't think there is going to be a problem justifying giving the win to one of the 5 people who went with "no high risk" (again, assuming "no high risk" actually verifies). Even if the final count ends up way higher than 900 or so, we also had two additional contestants in the "no high risk" category in the 1100-1200 range, which should allow a person who went with "no high risk" to beat someone who went with one.
Alternative scenario:
In the unlikely event that a high risk actually does occur, there was a contestant who went with a November high risk date, and they were pretty alone out there. Their tornado count would probably still end up a bit high, but they would probably end up close enough to justify giving it to them instead of one of the "no high risk"ers.
Bottom-bottom line:
There are realistically only 6 people who have a chance at winning this at this point. Some crazy shit would have to go down in the next 50 days for one of those 6 not to be the winner.
Usage:
Suppose "no high risk" verifies. Under this scoring method, it's not guaranteed that someone who went with "no high risk" would win. If the tornado count ends up significantly increasing to the point where the person who went with "no high risk" who was closest on tornado count (among all who forecasted "no high risk") ended up off by more than 203 tornadoes than someone who went with a high risk, then the person with the closer tornado count who did go with a high risk would end up with a lower score than the person who went with "no high risk".
Example:
Say "no high risk" verifies and the tornado count is 1450. Say person A says "no high risk" and 1000 tornadoes; person B says "high risk on XXX day" and 1400 tornadoes. In this case, person B would end up with a lower score than person A.
Bottom line:
This scoring method unfortunately does not account for how to differentiate between people with different days of "first high risk" in the event that "no high risk" verifies. However, given the current values, I don't think there is going to be a problem justifying giving the win to one of the 5 people who went with "no high risk" (again, assuming "no high risk" actually verifies). Even if the final count ends up way higher than 900 or so, we also had two additional contestants in the "no high risk" category in the 1100-1200 range, which should allow a person who went with "no high risk" to beat someone who went with one.
Alternative scenario:
In the unlikely event that a high risk actually does occur, there was a contestant who went with a November high risk date, and they were pretty alone out there. Their tornado count would probably still end up a bit high, but they would probably end up close enough to justify giving it to them instead of one of the "no high risk"ers.
Bottom-bottom line:
There are realistically only 6 people who have a chance at winning this at this point. Some crazy shit would have to go down in the next 50 days for one of those 6 not to be the winner.
