Solunars by Aldebaran Sidereal Academy

by Jim Eshelman on Fri Sep 13, 2013 3:05 pm

SteveS wrote:
BTW, since we already have the scheduled Q Days for big eventful games, would you allow more analytical weight for the Q’s, particularily if we get mixed interpretation for all the charts?

Theoretical answer, ok?

(1) The CapQ is hands-down the single most accurate mundane predictive tool in the toolbox. The CanQ is much less so EXCEPT that it fills in with high reliability when the CapQ has nothing.

I could have written a book just based on the quotidians and it would have blown people away. For the (now) 115 I've studied for the book on Sidereal mundane astrology, the CapQ had only 2 times when it gave a distinctly wrong answer, and 9 times when it gave NO answer. In 104 times out of 115, the CapQ alone gave a satisfactory or very satisfactory description of the event. That's 90%. Of those 11 times it was noncommittal or wrong, the CanQ was described the event in all but one case. (That one case showed in none of the daily methods at all.)

So... I'm really confident in saying that if the CapQ shows something, it has a 98% chance of being right and, if it shows nothing at all, then the CanQ will cover its tail.

However, the CanQ doesn't stand as well on its own in isolation. It scores about 70-75% as well (in a side-by-side comparison) with the CapQ.

(2) I don't know that I'd change my waiting based on mixed signals from other charts. I think I'd just tend to weight the quotidians more - 2 degree orb from conjunct, opposite, or square the Midheaven or Ascendant, using transiting and ingress (and progressed ingress) planets. If the signals are overtly mixed - say, Jupiters and Saturns for the same team - then I'd be nervous either way.

by SteveS on Fri Sep 13, 2013 4:11 pm

Continuing my Rookie ‘New Tool’ analysis for the Bama/AM game:

Now we need to look at any angular transit activity for the Capsolar and its Q chart. The game begins 2:30 CDT and will end app. 6:00 PM CDT. I am using 6:00 PM for my charts.

Transits to Capsolar for College Station.
Definitely Non-Dormant!

T. Sun 27,21 Leo partile conjunct College Station’s Capsolar IC (‘Home’ of Texas AM) in Paran with Capsolar Venus. IMO, this is HUGE! It is obvious to me this dead-on angular Sun is not only illuminating the Home Team, but with Sun Leo it is also illuminating the QB (quarterback), Mr. Johnny Football, Johnny Manzeil, last years Heisman Trophy winner. I read this as a tremendous benefic transiting paran for the home team and Johnny Football. I may crash and burn with this interpretation but I gotta call it objectivity like I see it, and I am a huge Bama Fan.
* My better half just told me temperature for game near 100 degrees.

T. Pluto (E), 2,20 orb to Capsolar Descendant reinforcing the original Venus-Pluto (E) conjunction in College Station’s Capsolar (The Master Chart for the entire year.)

Transits to Sept 14th CapQ for College Station:

Non-Dormant:
T. Mars (E) within 3 degree orb of College Station’s CapQ Descendant, partile 90 Q Saturn which is tightly conjunct CapQ’s zenith. T. Saturn is tightly conjunct CapQ’s zenith. I have to read this as malefic and definitely contradictory to the above Sun’s transit to Capsolar IC.

Now for transits for Tuscaloosa’s Capsolar & CapQ:

Transits to Capsolar:
Non-Dormant.
T. Jup partile conjunct Tuscaloosa’s Capsolar Asc. (Speaks for itself).

Transits to CapQ:
Non-Dormant.
T Nep partile 90 CapQ MC.

Now we need to repeat this same process for the Cansolar’s and CanQ’s, but first I got to grill dinner. * So far I have not seen enough evidence to render a clear judgement.

BTW, thanks Jim for your key insights in your last post—excellent.

by Jim Eshelman on Fri Sep 13, 2013 4:30 pm

Something that, in theory, should make this easier - though I'm not sure it does in this case:

Bradley cited a "rule" in his original report, which I have seen work exactly right in all but one or two cases: If transits to the Capsolar disagree with transits to the Q, ignore the transits to the Capsolar altogether - and go with the Q.

Also, trim the orbs back a bit. No more than 2 degree to Q angles. Preferable 1 degree for transits to the original ingress angles (but sometimes this seems to run over - just a bit).

by SteveS on Fri Sep 13, 2013 9:17 pm

Jim wrote:

Bradley cited a "rule" in his original report, which I have seen work exactly right in all but one or two cases: If transits to the Capsolar disagree with transits to the Q, ignore the transits to the Capsolar altogether - and go with the Q.

Bingo! We will definitely test this “rule” with this important game. This means we can drop Jupiter’s transit to Tuscaloosa’s Capsolar Asc, which now shifts more favour to the home team Texas AM with all the Q’s transits. I have had too much wine and will finish the Cansolar and CanQ’s analysis in the morning before kick-off. Another critical detail Jim with Bradley’s “rule.”

Jim wrote:

Also, trim the orbs back a bit. No more than 2 degree to Q angles. Preferable 1 degree for transits to the original ingress angles (but sometimes this seems to run over - just a bit).

This also shifts more favour to AM.

by SteveS on Sat Sep 14, 2013 12:57 am

Now for the Cansolar’s & CanQ’s:
College Station Cansolar:
Non-Dormant:
Mundo Venus partile conjunct IC tight 135 to Pluto.
* Interesting this repeats the same Venus-Pluto symbolism in College Station’s Capsolar. Could this mean great, intense, dramatic (Pluto) Victory Celebrations (Venus)?

College Station CanQ:
Non-Dormant
CanQ Saturn partile 90 CanQ Asc (Nadir) forming grand trine with Jup & Nep
CanQ Sun 1,52 from EP

Transits to Cansolar for College Station:
Dormant.

Transits to CanQ for College Station:
Non-Dormant
T Venus partile conjunct CanQ Saturn partile 90 CanQ Asc.

Cansolar for Tuscaloosa, Alabama:
Non-Dormant:
Can Nep Mundo 2,45 East of MC Nep (E) grand trine with Jup & Sat.

CanQ for Tuscaloosa:
Non-Dormant
Mundo CanQ Saturn partile conjunct CanQ IC grand trine Jup & Nep

Transits to Cansolar for Tuscaloosa:
Non-Dormant:
T. Nep partile conjunct Cansolar MC

Transits to CanQ Tuscaloosa:
Definitely Non-Dormant
T. Mars 16,23 Can
CanQ Asc 18,01 Can
T. Sat 13,26 Lib
CanQ IC 11,19 Lib
T. Venus/Saturn = CanQ IC
T. Venus partile conjunct CanQ Saturn mundo conjunct CanQ IC.

Conclusion: I deem the Cap and Can Q’s for Tuscaloosa more malefic than College Station Q’s, since we drop t. Jupiter on Tuscaloosa’s Capsolar Asc with Bradley’s “rule”, being in contradiction with Tuscaloosa’s malefic Cap Q’s. On the face of the Capsolar & Cansolar for College Station I deem much more angular benefic activity than Cap & Can Solars angles for Tuscaloosa. In fact there is no benefic angular activity on Tuscaloosa’s Cap & Can Solar angles. In all of this analysis, there is only one Paran with T Sun in Paran to Capsolar Venus for College Station which I think is the most potent benefic aspect of all aspects. Judgement: Texas AM wins in upset. I will bet a recreational sum of $ on Texas AM + 8.5. The line came out Bama favored by 7.5 and has moved 8.5. More money is being bet on Bama that AM. Jim, I would be very interested in your Judgement for my learning-- since you have much more experience with Bradley’s ‘New Tool’ than me.

by SteveS on Sat Sep 14, 2013 9:09 am

Las Vegas odds makers are not giving AM much of a chance winning this game. Money Line is + 280 AM & -340 Bama. This means if you bet $100 on AM to win the game and AM won-you would win $280. If you bet $100 on Bama to win the game and Bama lost you would loose $340. If AM wins this game, by Las Vegas standards, it would be considered a significant upset. The Q Charts favor College Station, The face of the Cap & Can Solars definitely favor College Station. Time will soon tell.

by SteveS on Sun Sep 15, 2013 5:39 am

After picking Texas AM to win over Bama with mixed ingress indicators for that game, I will now only limit sports analysis with Bradley’s ‘New Tool’ to past and future National & World Championship games.

by Jim Eshelman on Sun Sep 15, 2013 11:37 am

LOL

In 20/20 hindsight, I think this is the key: The charts showed no clear, unambiguous advantage. A winner was picked as the "less bad of the two." When it's too close to call, I think the astrological choice should be not to pick

The valid test of Sidereal ingresses for this purpose would be cases where the charts show a very clear advantage of one over the other.

by SteveS on Mon Sep 16, 2013 6:58 am

Jim wrote:

In 20/20 hindsight, I think this is the key: The charts showed no clear, unambiguous advantage. A winner was picked as the "less bad of the two." When it's too close to call, I think the astrological choice should be not to pick

The valid test of Sidereal ingresses for this purpose would be cases where the charts show a very clear advantage of one over the other.

I totally agree Jim! IMO, Sidereal ingress analysis for sporting events should only be applied for major championship games. My choice of which team would win the game failed but I won my small recreational bet with AM +8.5 (Bama did not cover the betting spread by only winning by 7 points), but more importantly my favorite team won the game.

I would like to learn your predicting method. Could you kindly suggest me a book or guidance?

This report explores the relationship between the techniques of Sidereal Mundane Astrology
and the outcome of the largest, most-watched, most culturally-engaging sports event in America
each year, the Super Bowl. As of February 7, 2016, we have 50 Super Bowls behind us, which is
a reasonable number to investigate empirically and statistically for patterns that we can use to
predict the outcome in the future.
Our primary goal was to find whether a pattern of astrological analysis exists, using the methods
of Sidereal Mundane Astrology, that conforms to the game outcomes of the past. If we could
identify a “best fit” pattern for historic data, we would be primed to test this pattern with predictions
of future games.
Such a pattern was found. It allows prediction of 90% of the games, and is accurate for 84%
of the games for which prediction is possible.