Hi Bob,

My explanation to this conundrum is to take the actual travel of the Moon and add a fixed orb of about 4 degrees.

So for a soccer game lasting about 2 hours in real time, travel = 1 degree + 4 degrees = 5 degrees. An American football or baseball game lasting 3 hours, travel = 1.5 degrees + 4 degrees = 5.5 degrees. A tennis match, basketball game, etc, lasting 2-3 hours, same as above. A cricket match lasting an entire day, probably meaning 10 hours (I don't follow cricket, so this may be off), travel = 5.5 degrees + 4 degrees = 9.5 degrees.

Granted, this latter one is not 13 degrees, but all the numbers are fairly close to John's and they make sense. I also have the feeling that the 13-degree limit was picked by how much the Moon travels in a 24-hour day, so it is a symbolic association. You may take the master's word for the 13 degrees as that is "what works". If you want proof, however, you will need to work out hundreds or even thousands of charts and see for yourself.

Interesting idea, but it's really a fudge factor, isn't it?. When you read his book carefully it is apparent that he really doesn't know quite what to make of the Moon. I'm in the process of checking his method using a large database I have. Maybe I'll get some insights.

Right now I'm looking at several very high-scoring games (by both teams), just to see if the scoring shows up. I don't see anything consistent. Next I'll pull out a dozen charts for very low-scoring games, just to see if there is a different 'feel' to them. But that's another topic.

Thanks for the input,

Bob

Hi Bob,

When you read his book carefully it is apparent that he really doesn't know quite what to make of the Moon.

That's a very interesting comment. Care to elaborate?

BTW I agree with Peter that the movement of the Moon is based on JF's experience of what works.

Cheers,
Ficina

Bulletbobb wrote:I'm in the process of checking his method using a large database I have. Maybe I'll get some insights.

Good luck with that. Would be interested to hear about your findings. I did start researching his method last year with EPL matches and found some of the rules questionable. Nevertheless, there is correlation between strong predictions and results, and there also seems to be an 'eminence effect', i.e. it works better on high-profile games.

Perhaps that was not well-phrased. What I meant to say is that the rules applying to the Moon are more complex than the other points. It's not a simple matter of 'the Moon always goes with the first house team', etc.
What to do if it rules the 1st or 7, or 4th or 10th? Does it rule one side or the other, or do we use it to rule the flow of events? In some cases he brings in the dispositor of the Moon to use when the Moon is otherwise engaged. On p.87 he says: "I am rarely confident in the judgement of one of these charts wneh Cancer either rises or sets: the dual role of the Moon causes confusion".

Regards,

Bob

Peter:

Which rules did you find questionable?
I am at present working on two sets of charts, both for American football.
One is for very high-scoring games, the other for very low-scoring games.
One would expect a dramatic difference between the two. Differences there may be, but dramatic they aren't.
Are you the Peter of Canada mentioned on the NZ racing cite?

Bob
Connecticut

Bob,

Just three from memory (without referring back to my notes):

1. That Moon contacting Fortuna means the buck stops there (i.e. ignore rest of aspects).
2. To look at in-sign aspects only (e.g. ignore conjunction between 29Ari and 1Tau)
3. To hold angles stationary (i.e. to reverse applying/separating aspects to angles).

In general, the more 'medieval' (irrational) the rule was the less it held up.

Not aware of the NZ racing site, so I'm probably not the same Peter.

First, for Peter: Thanks, I'll keep your three points in mind. With regards to #3, I don't think he reverses the applying/separating rule with regards to the angles, it just doesn't apply. He uses planets above or below the Asc, for example. Actually, he does this with several points: the nodes, antiscia, Fortuna, angles. He says explicitly that you hold antiscia still: planets apply to them. I assume this would also be true for mid-points, tho he doesn't mention them.

For Tom: I can't speak from experience about the WS you refer to, but I wonder what you were using for starting times? I timed all but one of the games for this years WS, and the actual starting times were very different from the nominal times given in some papers. Another factor is the ever-present question of who goes in the first house. In a WS with the Yankees I would be very careful of putting the Mets in the ist house, even when they were at home.

Quite a number of years ago I put together a collection of charts (about 50, as I recall) of situations where there were two games played in or near the same city at the same time. For example, the Jets and Giants were both at home and both played at 1pm. This is a rare situation, but it does happen on occasion. I'll have to see if I can find the list.

IMO, it is situations like this that need to be the focus of efforts to find a workable method. Basic astrological theory says that if you put up the chart for the start of a game you should be able to tell something about it (let's skip for the moment just what the something is). If your method doesn't work in that situation then I would be skeptical of it working in any other situation. The principal is the same. Restricting ourselves to Superbowls and WS games is great fun, I suppose, but my interest in all this is purely financial, and you'll never make much money if you limit yourself to a handful of games per year. You need to have a system that will enable you to look at a dozen or so games played at 1 pm on a Sunday and be confident that you can pick a few winners from the pack.

BTW, all I remember of those games was that the results were quite different. You might think that if the home team won by a landslide in the one game then the result should be the same in the other. No way, Jose!

Enough for now.

Regards,

Bob

Bob,

1. John explicitly says in his AA articles that one should hold everything in a chart still and then move the planet in question (just like Tome has described). So for example, if Lord 1 has just set below the horizon, i.e. just moved inside the 6th house, it is clearly separating from the Desc in normal astrological parlance. However, John says that it is applying to the Desc because, if you hold the angles still, Lord 1 will eventually reach the 7th house cusp (provided it is direct in motion). The same is implied in his book by saying that 'planet on the cusp controls, inside the cusp is controlled'.

2. It is very educational to do what you have done, i.e. looking at very similar charts. I wouldn't expect to have, however, the same result for say a dozen games going off with the same chart. There are two reasons for this: (1) Astrology in my mind is statistical in nature (in other words, the stars only incline and do not pre-destine), and (2) the odds for the favourite will be different in each of those games. Naturally, a favourite at odds of 1/10 will have a much higher chance of winning than another one at 7/4, regardless of astrology. So it's quite acceptable to have some favourites lose even if the chart indicates otherwise.

3. As I have stated before, there is a definite eminence effect just like Ertel has found in the Gauquelin data. The higher the level of competition, the more descriptive the chart will be in general. This agrees with what John says in his book and articles. You don't have to restrict yourself to world championships though. The same effect is working at all levels, and so you could be successful by concentrating on top league games, for example. As the significance of the sporting event drops, so do astrological indications it seems.

4. To make money at betting using astrology, one doesn't have to be right all the time. It is sufficient to have an edge over the crowd because the rest is taken care of by the odds. For example, if you can achieve a 60% success rate for sides with even odds, you are ahead of the game by 20%, which is a significant edge.

At any rate, I'll be watching your experiment with interest.

Bob:

I can't speak from experience about the WS you refer to, but I wonder what you were using for starting times?

This is a problem, and I don't recall exactly what I did when the Yanks played the Mets. First off various news outlets give slightly different starting times. In a World Series it is common to introduce the players before the game, and this throws off the estimated times of the first pitch. What I usually do is take the most commonly stated time and add about 10 minutes. If this produces a chart that has very late degrees rising or very early degrees rising, I am concerned, but if it is in the middle of the sign I don't worry about it being different from the actual starting time.

The other problem is that I'm a Yankee fan and event charts are supposed to be used when there is no real emotional connection. That may have thrown me off.

The Super Bowl is the same thing. Kickoff times are estimated based on the estimates of how long the pre-game hoopla will take. I just do the best I can.

The Giants and Jets play their home games in the same stadium. When they play each other sometimes the Giants are home team and sometimes the Jets are. In that case, I'd give the favorite the first house and not worry about who is home team. If you were looking at basketball and the Knicks and Nets were both home, or in Hockey the Devils, Rangers, and Islanders were all home, this could be a problem as each game would start at the same time in most cases.

If your interest is financial, then try John's horary method. Will I make money betting on this game? That's the real question. I'm a sports fan and not much of a gambler so I get personally involved - a different outlook entirely.

Tom

Changing the subject to event charts for horseraces, I have never found a planet just inside a cadent house effective. However much one may apply closely to an angle, I have not found such a placed planet to signify a winner. On the contrary, I have innumerable planets so placed signifying losers. This study has included all types of races from sprints to staying chases. I would be interested to learn if anyone has arrived at similar or differing conclusions.