Forecasting From Your "Gut"

[Skip Talbot]

I hear a lot of chasers say, "I went with my gut." What does that mean to you? To me, it's equivalent to saying, "I don't have or am intentionally ignoring the means to formulate a logical decision based on specific evidence, so I'll instead make a decision based on random, unidentifiable influences."

It obviously works, but not all of the time, and of course there are situations that you can over think. However, I can't accept making a "gut decision" because I have to know why I am doing something. If my decision is wrong, hopefully I can figure out why and try to correct it in the future. I'm accountable.

There are situations, where I don't have enough information to make a confident decision. Picking between seemingly identical cells that appear to be in the same environment, for example. In such cases, I think it's important that I acknowledge that I'm guessing. Perhaps I can go back and see if there was some information I was missing that was available. Maybe there wasn't, and that decision had to be left to chance.

I think the gut decision is based mostly off of what other people are saying (20 people on Facebook are looking at Beatrice, so I find myself gravitating toward Beatrice too) and memories (I got a tornado near Beatrice once, so I tend to pick targets near Beatrice). Who knows what else is creeping into your decision making process though? (Beatrice was this hot girl I knew...) Your decision could change based off your mood or literally what you ate. Is that ok? Do you accept that?

Sure, gut decisions can also have sound reasoning behind them. Perhaps you're doing some subconscious pattern recognition. If you can't consciously identify the reason why you're making a decision, how do you know whether this setup is similar to a warm front tornado outbreak that happened in 2004 or if you're being swayed by a bad Allsup's burrito? Maybe it's how life's decisions are made in general, and people prefer to shun critical thinking and logic for herd mentality, indoctrination, and intuition. I don't think that there is any place for forecast decisions based off the "gut" though or that they're even forecasts at all (more like guesses based off other persons' or other things' forecasts). Perhaps you think otherwise?

 

[Mark Ellinwood]

Usually if I say "I went with my gut" in a chase situation, it pertains to going after the higher risk/higher reward targets vs. going for the safer play. For an example, passing up a play on the triple point where storms will almost definitely initiate for a more cap-questionable area further down the dry line. Such a decision would probably be because of better instability and/or slower storm motion and/or somewhat better terrain.

 

[Rob H]

Sorry James, but you're a good example

When I first started chasing my partner used his gut a lot. Some days we'd do really well, and other days not so well. Since we "went by his gut" there was no way to learn from the chases and do better next time. Over the years he's learned to communicate the reasoning behind his gut feelings. I think he's forecasting better, and it's definitely helped me forecast better, and we can collaborate now.

Some people will tie this into saying that luck has a large part to play in chasing. I only agree with this in that luck will play as big a part as you want it to. Luck by its own definition is just a random chance attributed to a lack of knowledge about a situation or circumstance. The best chasers will always be the ones that minimize the effect of luck on any decisions. If you leave things to luck, your number of successes only go up when you increase the number of times you roll the dice.

 

[Dan Robinson]

I think most times the expression is used, the decision maker is observing the current situation and pulling from some prior experience or knowledge that he or she may not be explicitly thinking about at the time. Maybe it's what one has seen a storm do before. It could be something they read in a book or online chase account. Otherwise, the implication is that one made the decision based on some sort of supernatural sixth sense.

 

[Rob H]

I think most times the expression is used, the decision maker is observing the current situation and pulling from some prior experience or knowledge that he or she may not be explicitly thinking about at the time. Maybe it's what one has seen a storm do before. It could be something they read in a book or online chase account. Otherwise, the implication is that one made the decision based on some sort of supernatural sixth sense.

That's exactly what it is - but it leaves a lot to chance. Maybe the guys in KS/OK don't mind leaving a short chase up to chance, but if I'm driving down from MN - you betcha I'm going to do everything I can to minimize chance. You're only doing a disservice to yourself if you're not trying to recall that prior experience or knowledge and incorporate it into your forecasting.

 

[Shane Adams]

I see where Skip and Rob are coming from, but I'm not wired that way. I've always believed that over-thinking something can be as bad if not worse than just going by "feel." Whatever the definition of "feel" is or what inspires it is of no concern to me. I've messed up a lot of good chase days by over-thinking things. When you get down to it, at least for myself, the elements needed to create a tornado are fairly recognizable and simple. I chased for years without even looking at models, because I didn't know they existed. Admittedly, I wasn't very successful in those days because I had no idea about the important (yet subtle) factors that went into making a severe thunderstorm day a tornado day. After discovering the computer model, it was still several years while I slowly learned how to interpret them.

The main thing I started to realize the better I got at "forecasting" was, chasing seemed a lot easier back in the days before I knew so much. The more knowledge you cram, the more choices you have, and the more decisions you're faced with on a given day. I'm definitely a "first choice, right choice" kinda guy, and I hate when I second guess myself...especially in the field. I tend to be a "forest for the trees" type of mind when it comes to ridiculously analyzing something, to the point where, by the time I get my solution, I've forgotten what it was I was trying to solve. I'm just not a critical thinker....really not much of a thinker at all.

Skip raises some good points about what "your gut" really is, and in my case, for all I know, he could be right. I don't pretend to know what it is I'm doing out there; I've said for years, regarding my chasing style, I just kinda make it up as I go. That's one reason why I really can't chase with other groups of chasers I'm not familiar with, because I don't have the ability to dissect data and critically think, especially in an environment where you have give and take. The best I can do is point to my target, and maybe explain in a simple sentence why I chose it. But if questions about details follow, I'm pretty much blank. I just don't think about it that much.

Rob and I have had this conversation a few times in the chat room (which few use, cough cough). A great example of our differing philosophies is the Rozel day. We both nailed the event, but Rob spent a lot of time analyzing data and gave specific, detailed reasons for his choice. My reason was, I liked Greensburg as a target from my own data analysis the night before and the morning of, and just drove there. From there, we watched the fledgling storm that would end up producing Rozel develop over the course of an hour, then simply followed it northeast. There was nothing else to the decision that I could explain. But there was a lot of stuff in my head that made me do what I did that day, things I can't convey to others (maybe that's what Skip was talking about, I dunno.)

I don't lose sleep over busts, as far as wondering what the atmosphere did or didn't do. I don't lie awake at night wondering why I busted on one setup but not another which seemed similar. I approach chase "forecasting" like this: I take the data available which I can actually understand, analyze it, and make a target choice. In the back of my mind, always, I'm assuming more often than not, something's not going to happen the way I want. I don't really worry about "why?" because there will always be a new instance of "why?" IMO, there will always be mysteries to the atmosphere, and we will all bust on seemingly great setups for brand new, subtle reasons. The atmosphere is fluid, and there's nothing more unpredictable than fluid.

I don't want to know everything. I don't want to analyze a bust to death beyond something simple like "Ok, maybe the h7 temps WERE a bit high" or "Yeah, perhaps the lapse rates really WEREN'T steep enough to sustain a great storm." Forecasting severe weather is not a passion of mine. It's something I do in a limited capacity (my ability) to be able to increase my odds of success as much as possible, within the realm of me keeping my sanity. I can't spend an hour looking at 45 parameters on 12 different sites, because I'll forget the first stuff before I'm able to discern the later stuff for comparison. Bottom line, the only thing that's kept me going all these years is my passion for shooting tornadoes on video. Forecasting, for me, is nothing more than a necessary evil.

So in closing, Skip is probably right. I probably do have weird, subconscious reasons for making targets and in-field decisions. In fact I'd bank on it. I use my basic knowledge of the atmosphere of course, but I'm never going to be in the same league with the chasers who can talk about the inner workings of a setup, while seeing the atmosphere in 4-D in their minds. I used to be bothered by this, because it makes me a sort of "outcast" when it comes to chaser socializing and "talking shop". But, this is who/what I am, so I just roll with it. I do sometimes wonder how successful I could be if I truly grasped the atmosphere, but then I think how frustrating it would be to bust after spending so much time and energy putting thought into things. For a simpleton like myself, a bust is just another "Oh well, we'll try again next time" kinda deal.

 

[Jeff Duda]

I think most times the expression is used, the decision maker is observing the current situation and pulling from some prior experience or knowledge that he or she may not be explicitly thinking about at the time.

This response struck me as being the most agreeable.

Additionally, (and Rob touched on it), everyone has a different set of factors that are used to make a chase decision. Most chasers agree on the factors with the most weight:
-how much/is there enough CAPE?
-how much/is there enough shear?
-is there strong enough lift to overcome inhibition?
-is the storm mode likely to give visible, visually pleasing structures?

Therefore, the contribution of the weight towards making a chase decision based on those factors is practically identical between most chasers.

However, there are a large number of other factors with mixed weight or very little weight, such as:
-how much money/effort/time can I afford to put into this?
-Even if something does happen, will it be worth my money/time/effort?
-Quantity (however you measure it) of recent success and failure (the "Rocky" syndrome - i.e., how you handle the success/failure)
-Your mood
-Family/friends situation (do I have an ailing family member that I would rather attend to? is there an important event like a wedding, graduation, funeral etc. that I should go to?)
-Equipment situation (am I worried that something I use may be in a state of disrepair or may be falling apart and may fail while I'm out, thus possibly leaving me stranded or in danger?)
-Other (for example, on May 31st 2013 I was originally planning to drive to Ohio for a friend's wedding the next day, but seeing the potential for significant severe weather, decided not to leave; but wife was scared and didn't want me to chase, so I didn't)

It's the weight of THOSE factors that determines what someone really does. They may use a simple phrase that is more a tool from the literary library and call it "a gut decision".

 

[James Gustina]

For me using my gut is drawing on prior experience. Most of the times though I don't bite on a gut feeling, mainly because I've gotten absolutely burned by it numerous times. For example, I gave Caprock Magic a bit too much weight in my 2013 season because I had it work for me once on a day that seemed destined to bust. I also won't deny that I've fallen victim to the "everyone else is going there so why not?" mentality. For example, May 24 of 2012 was a garbage, spinning rockets MDT risk day in WI/MN/IA and I bit on it because so many other people were high on the 10% hatched tornado risk that was thrown out. I threw out all logical forecasting processes because "it felt right", mainly because so many other people went up there. It ended up busting horribly and nearly put me out of position for the tornadofest in LaCrosse the next day.

I prefer the diagnostic forecasting approach throughout the day because that works for me best and even after six seasons I don't have the experience like Shane or others do to make decisions not based off of a slew of real-time surface/satellite/upper-air data. I think the "gut decision" is almost entirely based off of previous experiences and pattern recognition going back to those experiences. I think that if your gut works for you and you find success with it, then there's no reason why it can't be mixed with a traditional forecasting approach.

 

[Chad Alcares]

Gut decision for me is synthesizing all possible inputs to come up with a decision without being completely consciously aware of why. It's not pulling anything out of thin air, but a shortcut based on operating knowledge, pattern recognition, experience and just good ol fashion field observation. It is how my mind works.

 

[Bob Schafer]

I think "gut", in the most literal definition, means that no objective reasoning whatsoever is factored in, but I know what you guys are saying. To add to Jeff Duda's points: The Day2 and Day3 forecasts are part of the equation, too. Sure, there are some freak chasers out there who will chase Wichita Falls one day and then drive overnight to chase Montana the very next day, but not me!

 

[Stephen Levine]

The Bible speaks of a "still small voice within". My experience is it usually conflicts or is at complete odds with logic, which includes basing future choices on past, usually successful results.
Time and time again, when I let logic rule over this "still small voice", it costs me dearly. On three occasions it completely cost me a successful tornado intercept, as I was considerably out of position and not to recover.
Sometimes this voice actually comes as a passing voice, sometimes a map with image, sometimes a burst of joy along with a child like thought that would require a radical and sudden change of chase target.
In these cases, logic might have worked but something changed in the mix on my way to, or upon reaching the target. Had I listened to this wild, crazy intuition, it would have taken me right to the tornado.

 

[Jacob Ferden]

My approach is pretty bare bones. I know the basics of how to read models and such, but I've never taken a fluid dynamics course. So I look at the models, look at SPC, look at some WFO discussions, draw on my past experience and instincts, and pick a target based off CAPE, dewpoints, composite indices, shear, etc. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. I don't know if that's "going with my gut" or just taking a straightforward approach to forecasting.

 

[Adam Lucio]

For me its a "feeling" that goes against the obvious or what everyone else is saying. Like in the days leading up to November 17th when the models (to me) were showing something big in Central/Northern IL, but the bulk of chaser forecasts and even the SPC areas were talking about Indiana, Kentucky, Southern IL. My "gut" told me to stay near home, and that time it paid off.

I try not to over analyze a setup too, as others have mentioned. When I over analyze, it always ends up being in ways things could go wrong, and the doubt clouds my mind.

 

[Justin Wilcox]

Put what Jacob and Adam said together and that about sums it up for me.

 

[Dave C]

I don't have or am intentionally ignoring the means to formulate a logical decision based on specific evidence"

For myself, I generally don't operate that way- unless I don't have enough facts and am absolutely forced to guess, which is a bad way to chase on so many levels and something I try to avoid. Due to my relative inexperience (I've only chased for a few years now) there are still quite a few scenarios that stump me. If I go with my 'gut instinct' when I get stumped, its usually applied as a tie breaker between two or more logical scenarios that all have appeal. I always at least *think* I know what I am doing and have a reason for doing it (even if I am naive and wrong some of the time). As I develop more experience chasing, I should think I will go by feel less and less, yet sometimes your intuition just knows, and its good to know when to listen to it. It can be the difference between a bust and Rozel, or it can keep you safe.

One example heavy in my mind is El Reno. I broke away from the storm before the wedge came down, as I just had a strong gut feeling that it was too much for my experience level and the traffic and proximity to the city freaked me out. I still wonder what would have transpired for me if I had not listened to that voice.