Foundation date or first game date?

mdinaz

mdinaz

Well-known member
When looking at a teams history chart and seasonal predictor, is it better to use the foundation date of the team and then project progressions from there, or to use the date/time of the teams first official game? The reason I ask is because very often foundation dates are murky, either with no time or sometimes the team was moved from elsewhere and true foundation date is difficult to determine. I'd be very interested to hear some opinions on this.

thanks
 
I

Inside Out Orange

Well-known member
If you use the first game date/time, doesn't it lead to the possibility of a lot of similar charts if you introduce an entirely new league? In fact two new teams playing against each other would have the same birthdata. The other teams in the league would probably have the same except location.

For example think of the old American Football League which started in 1960. Week 1 games were Broncos-Patriots, Oilers-Raiders, Chargers-Texans, Titans-Bills. These franchises would theoretically have the same astrological profiles.
 
B

Bulletbobb

Well-known member
I have posted on this topic on Houldings site, but you might try the chart for the first win of each season. Gets around the problem of 'murky' birth dates.
I used a first win chart with Mason diurnals to pick the Giants to win the Superbowl.

Bob
 
B

Bulletbobb

Well-known member
Don't quite see what a fantasy league (is that the right word?) as to do with the topic at hand. Besides, it is only for football.

Rectifying is great in theory, but rectifying charts for a hundred teams is quite a chore. The FW charts work very well indeed. Only problem is you have to start over each season.

Each to his own.

Bob
 
B

Bulletbobb

Well-known member
I'm probably the guy from Houlding's site.

Mason is Sophia Mason, a highly respected astrologer here in the US, and an expert on diurnal charts. She is no longer with us, unfortunately. I have a million questions for her.

I didn't exactly dismiss Frawley's method. I believe it is the best game chart method around. What I did say is that IMHO it doesn't work as well as Frawley would have us believe, and it fell flat on it's face in the Superbowl, the exact kind of high profile game in which it should have done 'excellently', to use Frawley's own term.

Rather than explain again what a diurnal chart is, I suggest you go to Houldings site and do a search on 'diurnal' and you will pull up the posts where I explain the technique.

Bob
 
L

LionKing

Well-known member
Is the technique that you use the same as Sophia Mason's? In one of her books she mention two different types. I seem to like the one that she use's for the day (diurnal) of the game and nix the one to use 'the beginning of the season for the particular team.' Maybe it's just me but the first one I mentioned seems to work better.
V/r LionKing
 
B

Bulletbobb

Well-known member
Yes, the diurnal method is from Mason.

I've posted more about my results with it on Houldings site, in the Speculation forum, so no point repeating here.

I experimented with her second method but could never get into it. Some parts of it may be valid, but her use of 1 and 4 for the favorite doesn't work well.

There is some question about whether diurnals should be done for the birth location or for where the person is at the time. The birth location seems to work for games, but I haven't tried the other location.

Also, don't use the first games, as Mason did. Use the first win, whether home or away. A very valid chart.

Bob
 
L

LionKing

Well-known member
That sounds like good advice I will try and use that one.

I just bought a John Frawley book and I'm looking into the info he provides. He use's one technique I found interesting. Using the 1st house for the fav and the 7th house for the "other" team. I looked at all of his charts provided in the book and came up with a good number of being correct. Now to use his technique on my own. I will probably have to look at 100+ charts and games to feel comfortable with it.

So far I haven't done well in basketball picks. I'm sure it's my fault. Ha!
V/r LionKing
 
B

Bulletbobb

Well-known member
His method doesn't work as well as he would like you to think it does. I know another chap who has done alot of work with it and as far as I know he isn't winning every game. That's why I'd like to see somebody spend time with Mason's method, as it provides an independant check on the game chart approach. There are alot of people trying to get game charts to work, and I don't think any of them are having any great success. There is something relevant to the outcome that is not shown in the gc, and that has to be looked into. You might want to do charts for American football, as the games are played only once a week. More time for the planets to line up for another game.

Regards,

Bob
 
L

LionKing

Well-known member
Well B.B., not to criticize your friend but so far today I'm a 100% correct on baseball and basketball. I am looking not only at those games but I will try it in hockey as well. Of course when the season starts I will use it in football games.
I feel it still needs tweeking here and there to make it work correctly. John Frawley writes an interesting book with fictious characters to add interest to the book.
Having said the above one of the games is still at play in the bottom of the 6th. From the score so far... not good, ha! But hey... the games not over yet. I'll shoot a note back here and let you know how that one turned out. V/r LionKing
 
L

LionKing

Well-known member
Ha! They lost 5-0. Like I said, it needs some "tweeking." Oh well I'll let you know how I do here in a few days. V/r LionKing
 
B

Bulletbobb

Well-known member
Some days you seem to pick nothing but winners, but then on others his methods don't seem to work at all. Welcome to the club!

Bob
 
L

LionKing

Well-known member
Frawley's book isn't too bad. It does seem to miss one thing though. I have found that if you obey the Bonatus Rule it might work better because it qualifies as an actual to use chart. (Bonatus Rule between three and twenty seven degrees on the AS.)
Still in experimentation though. Pretty challenging with all of the combustion going on. I'll keep all informed. V/r LionKing
Oh and I'm reading a "Anthony Louis book." Noting on sports predictions, but still a good book.
 
L

LionKing

Well-known member
Libra! I thought you would know that one better than me. The rule is that if it is earlier than 3 deg., it is not a valid judgement chart. Also with after the 27 degree. I found this out from the Anthony Louis book. It didn't say it in John Frawley's book. Wished it did. Still experimenting with it in the nba and mlb games. So this is still on the table. V/r LionKIng:sunny:
 
fensi88

fensi88

Well-known member
Ofcourse I know that rule, but I think it is something different. I read few years ago on one site, I can not remeber where, that some author take the ruler of next sign as ruler of ASC if ASC is later than 27 degree, so I thought it is something about that...
 
L

LionKing

Well-known member
You know, when you mentioned that, I remembered reading it in John Frawley's "Sports Astrology" book. It is on page 176. In that area if the book it was a question of; will I profit?
It stated; the moon can stand for the profit, if Lord 8 is busy, use the ruler of the next sign round.
I'd like to think that John Frawley had gotten that from William Lilly. The way that it is worded, it makes me think so.
I hope this is helpful. V/r LionKing:sunny:
 
Top