Where do you rank your proficiency as a chaser?

[Mark Gressman Jr]

Based on some sidebar conversation in the Social Media thread from @Dan Robinson and @JamesCaruso, I figured I'd start a thread/poll. As James suggested, I think it could make for an interesting discussion.

My hesitation with posting in forecast threads is that paradoxically, the longer I chase, the *less* I feel qualified to post anything insightful or useful on a setup. Like most of us, I'm nearly completely self-taught, with tidbits of knowledge cobbled together from experience, academic papers, other chaser's accounts and some of the talks (Youtube, et al) by figures in severe storms meteorology. This results in my concept of the atmosphere being unrefined and in many ways flawed. I feel that any time I post something meteorological, there’s probably a lot of behind-the-scenes snickering at how deficient my grasp of what most would probably say I should have mastered 25 years ago. Though that self-consciousness may be irrational, it does keep me silent on days I might otherwise try to offer thoughts.

Some of that became evident to me after I started mainly choosing secondary targets closer to home in the Midwest over the past 6 or 7 years. I figured I had more or less “mastered” the primary targeting, at least enough to have some degree of success. But these secondary target days have really revealed the gaps in my knowledge to the point that I wonder if my past successes were more luck than any knowledge I thought I had!

Wow Dan, that’s awesome, thanks for sharing that. I would never have thought that - I always considered you a proficient forecaster. I feel exactly the same way as you describe. After a similar amount of time chasing as you, I similarly feel that I should have mastered certain things long ago. Like you, my learning has been somewhat haphazard, through experience, trial and error, drilling down on a topic here or there, but not structured in an academic way, no semblance of a “curriculum.” As a result, many of my forecasts are based on intuition, which can be hard to articulate into a Target Area post.

I think there is a Dunning-Kruger effect here too - the incompetent think they’re competent, while the competent think they are incompetent. The more knowledge you have, the more you realize how much you don’t know, and the more intellectually humble you become (or should become - there are many in the so-called intelligencia or “expert class” that have no intellectual humility whatsoever - but I won’t go there right now ).

I know there was a similar question that's asked upon signing up to the forum, but I think the difference here is how you view your skill level, compared to how long you've been involved in the activity.

I haven't had the chance to be humbled by failed chases yet, but even though I have a pretty solid foundation of the science that I would consider to be intermediate, I'd probably rank myself as a novice and backyard chaser. My short term forecasting success is decent when I put the effort into it, but I'm still in awe of the people who have the commitment and skill to go out and make 500+ miles drives for 2% MRGL. I was surprised to see Dan's self evaluation of skill... considering the fact he was previously driving from West Virginia several times a year for events, that is legendary in my mind!

I guess it comes down to what you consider a success, and how much you enjoy all aspects of chasing. Even though we have a ton of amazing chasers here, I wouldn't be surprised to see the intermediate choice be the most popular.

Vote and give your reasoning!

 

[Ben Holcomb]

I'm definitely a yahoo chaser. High school drop out and no formal weather training!

 

[Mark Gressman Jr]

Lack of formal training doesn't necessarily make you a yahoo.... I've seen your stuff, and it's highly enjoyable!

 

[Ryan Walsh]

I would've selected yahoo regardless of the amount of formal or informal training I've had

 

[Dan Robinson]

I would rank myself as "experienced but average". I do OK enough to score on some of the big days, but in reality it doesn't take a lot to understand the basics of classic Plains setups (dryline-outflow boundary intersections, dryline bulges, warm fronts, etc). I get humbled by the atmosphere on a regular basis though. I have good streaks that make me look/feel like a savant, followed by bad streaks that make me look like a complete newbie. The ratio of good to bad hasn't really improved the longer I do this! Don't get me wrong, I've had some great days and I'm very thankful for them. I've seen everything I've ever dreamed of and more. The takeaway here is I'm proof that you don't need to be the best of the best to have fun and see some good stuff.

 

[Jonathan Scrogham]

I’m 15 with zero chaser experience… unless you count walking to the river to get a view of storms coming your way I’d definitely, without a doubt say backyard chaser.

 

[Mark Gressman Jr]

@Ryan Walsh - I probably should've added that you can pick more than one option. I figured the poll wouldn't be complete without yahoo being a choice, lol.

@Dan Robinson - I think that's the draw of storm chasing for me, the complexity of it all and the challenge to understand it. I'd imagine even the best forecaster, who completely understands the science, is going to whiff on a few setups from time to time. As you mentioned previously, going after secondary targets makes the chances of success that much harder, but more rewarding. I'm hoping this June will be my first opportunity to take on this challenge.

@Jonathan Scrogham - I can appreciate the frustration of being a backyard chaser since my limited free time makes it hard to make it to the Plains on a whim. You're on the right track by learning the science now, so you'll be able to hit the ground running when you do get some wheels.

 

[Todd Lemery]

If I had been asked about ten or so years ago I probably would have said I was a chasing master and I just didn’t “miss”. Humble pie is at times tough to eat, but it can be the best thing once you get used to the taste. I think I verged on being cocky with how much I thought I knew to now wishing I could go back in time and start with what I know now. And with that, there would still be a lot more that I don’t know than what I do know. That makes me a yahoo still trying to get to the yahoo plus category.
Being a yahoo isn’t a bad thing at all. Just getting out there doing your best is great. Figuring what went wrong when you bust and not patting yourself on the back too hard when you nail it is really important too. It’s a tough hobby for those who need constant success, so enjoying the ride should be the most important thing. (Coming from a yahoo)

 

[JamesCaruso]

I rated myself intermediate/proficient, but I feel like I suck, especially considering I have been doing this since 1996. Although, in my defense, as a chase vacationer, chasing only a max of 2 weeks (sometimes less) per year, in 25 of these past 28 years, only comes to a year of actual chasing - well, actually far less than that, when you add up the “chase days.” Nowhere near the proverbial 10,000 hours required for expertise.

It is hard to judge success. I have missed plenty of good stuff - sometimes, embarrassingly, being on the “right” storm and somehow still not seeing the tornado. Some of my failures have been downright comical. Even successes sometimes feel like failures: Should I have gotten closer to the Campo tornado (2010)? Or to the Dodge City tornado (2016)? It always feels like a failure when somebody else gets it. But there will always be *somebody* there. There will always be *somebody* that got closer, or that got a better view or a better picture/video. The important thing to remember is, it’s not the *same* people. Nobody gets everything. I think the .300 baseball analogy is the right one.

But I do feel like I have plateaued. I regret not spending more time on a disciplined, structured, more-academic approach to studying meteorology. I have learned through experience, reading stuff here and there. No structured deep dives or progressive learning on particular topics. Every year, after a chase trip, I say I am going to learn more. Then it’s back to the grind, working long hours, with no energy or desire to read technical material or look at a screen after 10-12 hours of my professional work as a CFO. There are still many things that confuse me when forecasting - for example, how to resolve inconsistencies among models, and which ones to rely on, which ones to disregard, what the biases are. I still don’t know all the more-arcane parameters. There are times I have trouble understanding how the storm I am watching is evolving, and what it is going to do next. I recall countless chases where I probably gave storms a wider berth than I needed to, and missed things as a result.

The best way to learn anything is through deliberate practice. This has a very specific definition and approach, and one key component is feedback and coaching. That is something I have never really had much of. Sure, success or failure is feedback in itself, but if you don’t know WHY you succeeded or failed, it is useless. It is often impossible to forensically reconstruct events enough to figure out what I might have done differently in the field. Sometimes you can go back and figure out where you went wrong in the forecast, but sometimes it’s hard to figure out exactly why storms failed to form, or why one became dominant and another fizzled. There are mysteries that haunt me to this day. ST should be one place to do post-mortems, but quite frankly sometimes there is no response when questions like that are posed. I often intend to study past chases when I get home, but then life gets busy, and I don’t have the patience to dive back in, especially with incomplete data.

I think at this point, even if I tried to get better “book knowledge,” there would probably be diminishing returns. Sure, I like to learn for its own sake. But there are other things I like learning about during the off-season (I spend my recreational learning time reading a lot of non-fiction and biographies). I think I know enough to have a reasonable chance at success, and to feel engaged in the *process* and enjoy it as it is unfolding. I do get very frustrated when I screw up, and I get down on myself, wondering if it’s really my “fault,” or just part of the randomness of things that would have affected anyone the same way, regardless of knowledge or experience. In other words, did I really make a bad forecast or decision in the field? Or was it probabilistically the right call, but we got the unexpected tail event instead.

Maybe when I retire, I will finally up my game with some more formal study. But for now, I am content enough with my knowledge and approach

 

[Diane Bianchi]

I checked back yard chaser, (hubby wants me to be safe) although I consider my "backyard" as being in my county, or one county over, mostly spotting but moving. I've seen some amazing storms and structure, but not the big one yet.

 

[Sean Ramsey]

I rated myself as a yahoo chaser, meteorologically speaking. After 20+ years I understand the basics and little more than that. I get cross-eyed when it comes to the details of the atmosphere and figured I would be better served honing other skills like photography, which allows me to do more with less. As a result, I've gotten very good at capturing tornadoes, but I could be so much better at catching them on a consistent basis if I took the time to learn. That being said, I've been blessed to see a good many of the best storms in the last 13 years.

 

[Ryan Schwartz]

I went intermediate in the poll as I feel like I'm a better forecaster than chaser. Self-taught myself how to forecast through Tim Vasquez's books other meteorological course textbooks I've picked up along the way. I don't know if I really call myself a chaser, as I tend to stay fairly local and usually only head out when storms have already initiated. Being in my mid-40s now and married, I don't have the energy to drive halfway across the country in hopes of seeing a good storm. Probably makes me more of a spotter by definition, but I'm primarily out for the photography aspect now. It's been more of an evolution with age - single in my 20s I was definitely more of a yahoo due to inexperience and positioning myself in not-so-great spots because I saw the chasers on Discovery TV do it, I figured that was the proper way to chase without knowing better.

 

[Drew Terril]

I liken myself to the small school that gets into the NCAA tournament out of a one bid conference and makes the most of the opportunity. Aside from 4/27/11 and 4/7/06 (my first chase actually), I've never made it out on one of the big slam dunk days. Even on those two days, I wasn't able to make the main risk area, but still was able to score. For years, it was lack of money, now it's lack of time, since I can't drop everything and put in for PTO only a day or two in advance (my work requires two weeks notice to take off). But, like the scrappy junkyard dog, I've been able to make the most of the opportunities that I've been afforded.

The vast majority of my chases have been on 2 or 5% days, and I can only think of a very small handful of chases in nearly two decades where it was 10% or higher. Until I got a better grasp on forecasting, I did things almost entirely on surface obs the day of, going back to the days of using APRS to query weather data and plotting it manually. These days, I have a much better grasp on forecasting, but I still rarely look at models the day of if I'm actually chasing. I've learned that information overload is a real thing, and have taken measures to prevent paralysis by analysis. If I can get myself into the ballpark, I usually can find a storm (or the storm) that produces.

As far as my chasing style, I'm a firm believer in the miracle of telephoto lenses. Between that, and my time in the military leaving me with a heavy desire to not tempt fate any further than I did in my 20s, I generally stay back unless circumstances absolutely dictate otherwise. Funny enough, I've come full circle in my photography too as I've gone back to shooting in film. I still take the DSLR when I chase, and use it, but (as long as I don't run out of film) my focus is definitely on the film SLR. There's a vibe with film that I've never been able to duplicate with digital.