As for the event charts, what works for me, more or less, are L1/L10 and L7/L4 (and their antiscions) and the Moon on/in the cardinal cusps. Well, the ASC representing the favorite.

But as you can imagine, it is a specific testimony and does not happen very often. But since there are many games close together, there has to be this sort of precision astrology -- otherwise all the favorites or all the teams wearing dark kits would win based on the Moon's aspects. For example, in professional hockey all visitors are wearing white kits so you have a problem (or a solution?) right there.

GB wrote:

Konrad wrote:I noticed this but then both Celtic and Rangers won quite convincingly in Scotland and wouldn't the Sun destroy Norwich too?

Good point

Back to the drawing board! Unless anyone else has an idea about the four matches at 15:00?

It's possible that Chelsea was such a strong favourite that Sun conjunct Pluto in the 7th was not strong enough to help the underdog win, but then I might have expected a draw ...

On a more general point, I think it's very useful to try to explain the results after the event, to help develop our ideas and methods. Some people tend to avoid the matches that all start at the same time, but I like them. You can get some of them with different rising signs than others (as at 1500 today) because of the different locations. In some the favourite is the home team, in others it's the away team - possible help in deciding if the Ascendant is the home or fav. Sometimes an angular planet is on different sides of the angle. Small differences such as these could help us decide what's important.

Graham

I agree, Graham. For me, the matches all starting at the same time are the ones which are going to lead you towards the reasons why the games finished with different results (if there is a way of doing it with event charts, of course) rather than just getting lucky with stand-alone games.

Although I'd prefer not making public predictions right now while I am testing some ideas (based mainly on how planets receive the luminaries, in particular that one of time), there are some thoughts on the games at 15:00.

As I said, first, consider whether the sig assigned agreeably to colours (black for Saturn, blue for Jupiter, red for Mars, orange or yellow for Sun, light blue or pink Venus, combination of light colours for Mercury, white for Moon) has any dignity on ASC (nothing less than triplicity), fall or detriment is very harmful; this mainly relates to the home favourites or if the odds are equal.

Second, in a day chart look at the position of the Sun - how the sigs receive the Sun. If the sig is 1) in the Sun's detriment or fall or 2) vice versa the Sun is in the sig's detriment or fall, or 3) the sig is in its own detreminet or fall or 4) inconjunct, this is a strong testimony for the underdog. In a night chart do the same respecting the Moon.

If both luminaries are ruled by the same planet that planet is the winner (a very safe testimony). Perhaps there could be exceptions, but in those charts which I have none moved the result away.

Third, look which planet is in an angle. If there is one that one is the winner, unless it is the fave and that planet has no dignities on ASC (then draw could be expected).

Forth, see in which sign is the lord of hour and do the same as with respect to the Sun in a day chart and the Moon in a night chart.

Fifth, Moon's aspects to planets, thier antiscas and POF and its antisca. If one plays in white then the Moon's aspects will indicate the fate of that team (good or bad) depending on which planets she is joined. If the Moon aspects the sig, it is a good testimony for that team unless there is a negative reception (by fall or detriment) or the sig is impeded so that it cannot receive the Moon's disposition. Moon's conjunction (unless in Moon's detriment or fall) or trine is good, sextile unreliable, square and opposition is bad. If one plays in white, then it relates to the team playing in white but not whom considered the fave.

Six, the "well - being" of POF and its antisca if not conjunct oppose or square malefics (allow for an orb of not more than 2 degrees): Saturn, Mars or any other debilitated planet, Transaturnian planets or evil fixed stars (Algol for example). See the condition of its dispositor and its aspects to POF - partile or nearly partile opposition or square and inconjunction (whole sign aspects) is bad.

As regards Aston Villa - Swansea. Aston Villa plays in claret - Jupiter.
The game started with Gemini rising. Jupiter is detriment here and himself placed in the 12 th from Gemini. The Sun the lord of time is in Capricorn so was received by the former from his fall. This perfectly matches with what I said regarding the reception of the Sun in a day chart.

QPR - Norwich - won on account of the angular Mercury (the "Canaries" - yellow and green).

Blackburn - Stoke. Stoke was the bookie's fave though it won not because of being a marginal fave but that its sig - Mars (red) received the Sun from exaltation and the Moon from house. As it is a day chart the reception of the Sun should be paid attention to in making a prediction. If it were a night chart, it would have given nothing but zero points in the league table. Although the Mars is the dispositor of the Moon it is inconjunct here, so unable to receive the Moon (we can expect only the team to score but definitely not to win, of course, if there is no huge difference in actual strength, then we need something more conviencing for the underdog).

Wolves - Chelsea, here the odds for the underdog were longer than in others. Chelsea (Jupiter - blue) did not play at home, if their were then backing Wolves at long odds would have been a good choice. See the game at 15:00, December 31 with Aston Villa (Gemini rising and the Sun, the ruler of time, in Capricorn).

Wednesday, Jan 4.

Everton - Bolton 1-2
Newcastle - ManU 3-0

It would seem that the underdogs still are ruling the Premier League!!
Wow!

It's a good news for astrology. It keeps in line which I have stated with respect to the luminaries, in particular one of time, how they are received or receive the planets. Obviously, a Taurus Moon does not like very much Manchester United (yesterday she happened to rule also the hour).

I found some justification for which I said about luminaries in Bonatti's Book of Astronomy Treatise 6: On questions (translated by Ben Dykes), chapter 23 On the knowledge of the war's victory - who will win (p.500):
"Look even in the knowledge of the war's victory to see which of the combatants ought to be the victor. And you will see if the Sun and the Moon were located from the line of the 10th house up to the line of the 4th house, on the side of Ascendant; or from the line of the 4th house up to the line of the MC on the setting side, and they were free and clean (namely fortunate and strong): because they will signify the war's victory on the sine in which they are. Like if they are on the side of the Ascendant, they will signify it for the querent or inceptor. If however they are on the setting side, they will signify it for the adversary. If perchance they were unfortunate or weak, they will signify the contrary: because he on whose side they are, will succumb."

As I have stated I prefer colour method to ASC - DSC (whether the fave or the home team on ASC). This is in line which I have said if both luminaries are ruled by the same planet, we have a winner if the team happens to play in colours agreeable to the planet who disposes the luminaries. And if there happens some negative reception, for instance the luminary of time is in fall or detriment of that planet whose kit's colours agree with the planet who so disposes the luminary or vice versa, it's a bad news for that team, in particular if they are the fave.

What of the Everton- Bolton game then? If you give Everton Jupiter, then the hour lord is in his domicile while he is in the 10th place and the triplicity lord of the Asc degree. I suppose it is then dependent on who you assign to Bolton who were wearing the home kit of white and navy.

Konrad, I admit I got wrong Everton - Bolton. I did not believe that they would lose (I thought it would be a draw on account that Jupiter rules ASC by triplicity and Mercury, lord of hour and day, is in the same triplicity as ASC.

First, we look whether the sig has any dignity in angles, in particular ASC. Well, Jupiter has triplicity there.

Second, we look how the planet is received by the luminaries, in particular that one who rules the time. The Moon was in Taurus in the same sign as Jupiter, so that from this perspective Jupiter is disposed pretty well by the Moon.
As Everton (blue) is definitely Jupiter, there were only two planets who would be a fit sig for Bolton (mixture of white and navy) - Mercury in Sagitarius or Venus in Aquarius. If you chose the latter, then it is obvious who would win (Venus disposes Moon, who herself has exaltation, here and Jupiter by house).

The problem is if Bolton's sig is Mercury, then this combination should favour Everton and least they should have drawn assuming that the dispositor has some power over the planet who it disposes. On the other hand it seems that the planet can hardly exercise its power over one who it disposes if she is inconjunct the domicile sign in which the relevant planet is.

However, I have observed (some more testing is needed) that it is bad for the team if the planet who rules the hour also rules the opposite sign of its sig (here its negative effect could be reinforced by Mercury ruling also the day).

There was also some other corruption of Jupiter - Sun, the ruler of ASC, was in Capricorn, fall of Jupiter - Everton's sig. I would like to give more weight to this negative testimony than being in the same triplicity as the Sun, ruler of ASC, and in the 10th from ASC. Besides being in the same triplicity tends to produce draw, if there is a fave to move the result away from the result.

It's very hard to weight the testimonies one against other, in particular if there is a coctail of contradictory ones.

If Newcastle - Manchester was a straightforward underdog's game, Everton - Bolton was a mixture of contradictory testimonies where negative ones proved to oughtweigh the positive ones.

Yes, I appreciate it is at times difficult, Janis and I think Venus would probably be the correct colour signification for Bolton.

The ancient consideration of domicile rulership was one of a guest/host relationship rather than one of power. A planet in another's sign had to work with the resources of that planet which rules the sign it is currently traversing, so have you ever thought of looking also at the colour significator's dispositor for an indication of what it has to use?

Are you using quadrant based houses in your predictions, Janis? I ask as Mars is angular in Alcabitius in the Man Utd chart but is averse to the Asc in the 2nd sign, so perhaps this would weaken Man Utd further?

Konrad wrote:

The ancient consideration of domicile rulership was one of a guest/host relationship rather than one of power. A planet in another's sign had to work with the resources of that planet which rules the sign it is currently traversing, so have you ever thought of looking also at the colour significator's dispositor for an indication of what it has to use?

That's right but not in war charts. If the ruler of ASC is in the 7th (opposite sign), this is for sure that the querent's army will not succeed in a war according to Bonatti. The same is true in a competition, which bears some similarity with war. There the rulership means not a guest/host relationship when the host tries to attend to the guest's needs as best as he can, there it means only power.

I use the sig's dispositor only to see which kind of reception or any at all it has with the sig. If there is negative one or the dispositor is in its own detriment or fall, it corrupts the sig.

I use Placidus cusps but consider a planet angular only if it is in the same sign as the cusp of the relevant angle. Yes, Mars was averse to ASC in the 2nd sign, but it does not matter so much if compared with the Moon, ruler of the time and the hour, being in detriment of Mars in Taurus. So Moon was "greeting" Mars from the latter's detriment. I think that aversion should weaken further the relevant sig, but it was not the main testimony.
If we consider that a planet who is not in its own domicile depends on the condition of its dispositor, then Mercury for sure will kill its guest, unlucky Mars.

Janis Valkovskis wrote:That's right but not in war charts. If the ruler of ASC is in the 7th (opposite sign), this is for sure that the querent's army will not succeed in a war according to Bonatti. The same is true in a competition, which bears some similarity with war. There the rulership means not a guest/host relationship when the host tries to attend to the guest's needs as best as he can, there it means only power.

I use the sig's dispositor only to see which kind of reception or any at all it has with the sig. If there is negative one or the dispositor is in its own detriment or fall, it corrupts the sig.

I use Placidus cusps but consider a planet angular only if it is in the same sign as the cusp of the relevant angle. Yes, Mars was averse to ASC in the 2nd sign, but it does not matter so much if compared with the Moon, ruler of the time and the hour, being in detriment of Mars in Taurus. So Moon was "greeting" Mars from the latter's detriment. I think that aversion should weaken further the relevant sig, but it was not the main testimony.
If we consider that a planet who is not in its own domicile depends on the condition of its dispositor, then Mercury for sure will kill its guest, unlucky Mars.

Of course but in Bonatti's charts, he is using the Asc/Dsc axis, so one of the rulers in detriment will show it positioned in the other's house - not a consideration here.

Have you taken note of when a significator is in aversion to its dispositor?

Konrad wrote:Have you taken note of when a significator is in aversion to its dispositor?

This is great astrology! But what do you mean?? By powers or application? I thought a planet applying to it's dispositor was worthy of consideration whatever aspect...

Andrew Bevan wrote:

Konrad wrote:Have you taken note of when a significator is in aversion to its dispositor?

This is great astrology! But what do you mean?? By powers or application? I thought a planet applying to it's dispositor was worthy of consideration whatever aspect...

By "aversion" I mean the planet cannot see its dispositor by any of the classical aspects.