What is the definition of an experienced, veteran chaser?

[Jeff Miller]

Saw this in a discussion elsewhere and wanted to know what the concensus is among the community as to what defines an experienced, veteran chaser, what one must accomplish to be "accepted" as an experienced, veteran chaser and if there is a difference between "experienced" and "veteran". I personally am indifferent, just curious and thinking what the opinions are.

 

[Tim Vasquez]

I would say an experienced chaser is someone who's weathered an entire chase season on their own, chasing on all the days they could get out and generally getting a few good storm or tornado pics under their belt.

A veteran chaser has traditionally been considered to be someone who started in the 1970s-1980s, though that definition is probably changing to include the 1990s. Really I'd have to say anyone who's been out ten seasons or more.

There's some interplay between them though... I wouldn't call them hard & fast rules.

Tim

 

[Robert Dewey]

I agree with Tim... That would be my general definition.

 

[David Drummond]

I brought this over from the other thread, thought it more appropriate here:

Would it be fair to ask EXACTLY what defines an "experienced, veteran chaser"?

This is really splitting hairs, but I'll remove the word "veteran".

Wasn't meaning to split hairs, but these are terms that are attributed to various individuals at various times in various ways. There doesn't seem to be any sort of community accepted definition as to what should make one "expererienced" or a "veteran". So a person that goes out every chance they get one or two season and then hardly goes out much other than big events becomes experienced, are they moreso than someone who is able to go one solid week ever year and has done that for several years. Is there a tornado capture count that should come in to play? How many years should one have chased before they can consider themselves a veteran? Can we just take their word for it when they state they have chased a number of years, or do they have to be acknowleged by one of the "chase gods" to be legitimate? Or should they simply show proof in the form of images taken?

Those very terms, "experience" and "veteran" do not seem to apply evenly across our community and it's one of the things that I think brings in that whole elitist talk.

I know of people that I know for a fact who have chasing in some capacity since the 80s that aren't considered "veteran" chasers by the ones that consider themselves "veteran" chasers. I know some proclaimed "experienced, veteran" chasers that hardly ever chase any more.

IMHO it appears to many that all it really boils down to is "Did you make a "name" for yourself in the 80s chasing? If you didn't or aren't friends with someone who did, then you are really a nobody and no amount of windshield time or tornado photographs will make you "experienced" or "veterans" in the eyes of the "chaser gods".

The really IRONIC thing about it though, is that many of these lesser experienced, non veterans are bringing home a heck of a lot more tornado and storm images than most if not all of the self proclaimed vets in the last 2 or 3 years.

So you then becomes the real expert you have to ask? The person that does it here and there over many years and brings home 5 tornadoes a year, the person that does it every chance they get but has only been at it 3 years, yet consistently bags 20+ tornadoes a year, or the guy sitting at a desk somewhere with letters behind his name forecasting and rarely ever gets out in the field? Or how about someone that has been going out every chance they get for 10+ years, consistently bags a fair number of tornadoes every year, but isn't really "politically correct" generally speaks their mind on various chasing issues? Does that preclude them from the elusive "experienced, veteran" status?

I pose a lot of things for thought, but I think some of these very things are what make some of us peon chaser feel like we are supposed to be second class or something to the "elite". There just seems to be no general standards of acceptance other than who you know.

 

[Mike Peregrine]

Seems to me that the whole idea of a veteran elite is pretty subjective at best. It's not like there's some sort of graduation ceremony at some point that qualifies someone to suddenly be considered in this category, and many times I think we've all found that it tends more often than not to be a matter of people attempting to qualify themselves in this light. It's also been my personal experience that the chasers who actually did get started early on and have managed to stick with it all these years do not for the most part put themselves in this category, and many times hate the term as much as the rest of us seem to.

So for that reason, I believe that what qualifies someone as a veteran chaser is the way they are seen in the eyes of their peers and no one else. It's someone who has put in the time and made a contribution, but it is never a self-imposed title.

For me, chasing is more like skiing. As you get older and do it more often you graduate from the green slopes to the blue to the blacks. For some people this happens faster than others ... but chasing is all about a process of continual growth for everyone much more than it is about attaining a certain title, status or label. Labels get in the way too much ... base your opinions on good judgment instead.

 

[Steve Miller TX]

I totally agree with David. You are trying to achieve the impossible and in the meantime pissing everybody off and creating a rift in the chaser community. I don't know anybody who would fit nice and neat into the box you are trying to create. You are walking through a minefield if you try.

Alot of success depends on how often a person can go chasing. Those who don't hold a steady job and with mortgages as well as a family to take care of are going to bag more tornadoes. Does this make them the better chaser? How about those chasers whose job (full or part time) is to chase storms? What about chasers with gobs of money running every gadget in the world including wx-worx and cellular internet? I'm sorry, but those with wx-worx have a serious advantage over those who do not.

My point is that there is no realistic way to FAIRLY "measure" a chaser and then apply a label to them. There are way too many variances in the equation to be solved. If you can't do it fairly, then you shouldn't do it at all....unless you are in favor of separating the "haves" and "have nots". Of course, it's a free country...but it's lonely at the top.

Wait, maybe we could start something like the Boy Scouts. New chasers could come in as Cub Scouts and then through performing a series of tasks or accomplishments, you could get a merit badge or other such denomination to mark your progress. You'd get merit badges for hand analysis, nailing a traget area, miles driven, for each video sold, and for how many Allsups burritos you cram into your mouth and then survive the next day. Special awards for each tornado bagged and windshield knocked out by hail.

Then when we all get to become Eagle Scouts, we can join the elite chaser forum! Gee willickers! That would be so nifty! LOL!!!

 

[Jeff Miller]

I totally agree with David. You are trying to achieve the impossible and in the meantime pissing everybody off and creating a rift in the chaser community. I don't know anybody who would fit nice and neat into the box you are trying to create. You are walking through a minefield if you try.

This was simply and totally a question based on verbage used. I dont see how this creates a "rift" and torks off people due to a simple question. When I post a question, I only post a question that is designed to solicit intelligent and spirited conversation amongst the community. Now, I regret doing so, and shall keep silent.

 

[Steven Williams]

Tim's definition of a veteran is bang on. As for 'experienced', thats a bit subjective and depends on your point of view. In my opinion, being an active chaser over three season makes you experienced.

 

[David Drummond]

Don't regret it Jeff. I go to extremes to make my point, but my whole point was summed up by Steve in this statement:

My point is that there is no realistic way to FAIRLY "measure" a chaser and then apply a label to them. There are way too many variances in the equation to be solved. If you can't do it fairly, then you shouldn't do it at all....unless you are in favor of separating the "haves" and "have nots". Of course, it's a free country...but it's lonely at the top.

There is just wayyyyyy too many variables into what people know, can realistically do with other things going on in their life. With a lack of any formal "chasing education' ladder, lack of any "career" ladder, and the entire HUGE blend of types of chasers (i.e. hobbiest, media, photographic, etc etc) when all is said and done you can't really consistantly quantify any one chaser over another as to whether or not they fit into "experienced" of "veteran". While Tim's over generalized definition presented is a good "average", it can't be logistically applied to everyone. Yet, that seems to be EXACTLY what is taking place in the form of this private forum area.

When that happens, SOMEONE has to qualify based on SOMETHING as to whether anyone allowed there falls into those very definitions as was already stated in the polling post about it. When that happens, it really comes down to a matter of who your friends with and who they aren't.

I challenge any of the member of that area to come and state unequivocally that any person with X amount of years of chasing or X amount of time chasing would be asked to come there, EVEN IF THAT PERSON WAS DISLIKED BY THE MEMBERSHIP THERE FOR SOME REASON OTHER THAN THOSE QUALIFICATIONS.

And that is where the problem lies and the elitist tags are coming in. It's subjective solely based on the personal opinions of those that are members there.

In the end, no one wants to feel second class and IMO that is what the private area does make most people feel, whether they admit it or not.

 

[Mikey Gribble]

I agree with what David and what everybody else said about how you can't establish criteria to determine chaser status because there are far too many variables.
There could be somebody who has chased for 15 years, but they don't get out that much, they don't get extraordinary video/photos, and they don't put in the extra time during the off-season to get better at forecasting/chasing. They would be considered an experienced veteran chaser. Then you could have somebdoy else who has only chased for 5 years, but they are a hardcore chaser and get out chasing every chance they get, bag a lot of tornadoes and get good photos/video, and they work hard in the off season to study up on forecasting. This person would more than likely not be considered a veteran experienced chaser by the so called "elites".
I don't really care how long somebody has been chasing. That doesn't mean much to me in most cases (there are exceptions). I look at what they accomplish each season and how they do it.

 

[Steve Miller TX]

This was simply and totally a question based on verbage used. I dont see how this creates a "rift" and torks off people due to a simple question. When I post a question, I only post a question that is designed to solicit intelligent and spirited conversation amongst the community. Now, I regret doing so, and shall keep silent.

First my apologies...I was on the wrong forum...LOL!!! I'll take that particular part back. But, there is defnitely a rift being cause by the "elite" list as being discussed elsewhere and by the ongoing poll.

 

[Gabe Garfield]

Well, all I know is that I am not a good chaser. I had some success last year, and marginal success this year, but I made many, many bad decisions (that should have been no-brainers) this year. 2005 was my 6th consecutive chase season, so, I definitely won't be a "veteran" for a while. LOL

There is definitely an advantage to technology, and I think a great many of the most successful chasers (of late) have access to the best technology. Also, more importantly, is how much you can actually chase (as has been mentioned).

Even so, I'd say greater than 10 years of consistently chasing (say, more than 5 days every year) would qualify someone to be a veteran of chasing (IMO).

Gabe

 

[Jason Boggs]

What does getting a tornado every year have to do with being a veteran chaser?

Take an NFL q-back that's been in the league for 20 years. Maybe someone like Vinnie Testaverde. He is a true veteran q-back. Say he threw a touchdown pass every year he played except in 1992. So does that automatically take him away from the "veteran status"?

Remember that we are not tornado chasers...We are storm chasers.

 

[Karen Politte]

I would say an experienced chaser is someone who's weathered an entire chase season on their own

Tim

What does being on their own have to do with anything?? Surely the passion for severe weather, forecasting severe weather, chasing and learning the meteorology of chasing far outweighs "weathering the chase season on their own".

Just curious...... 8)

KR

 

[Steven Williams]

What does getting a tornado every year have to do with being a veteran chaser?

I agree. And you can learn a lot from a chase season without seeing tornadoes. Even the busts are part of the learning curve.