Our Methodology

The advantage of using midpoints is to be able to consider what Ebertin calls the individual points of a horoscope, the Angles, Ascendant (AS) and Midheaven (MC), respectively the degree that is ascending on the eastern horizon at the specific time and location of an event – the start of the match in our case – and the culmination point corresponding to the highest point at which the local meridian intersects with the ecliptic. “These are known as the individual points because they move about one degree in four minutes,” writes the German astrologer.

This way, it is also possible to successfully interpret astral charts of matches taking place at the same time, as these sensitive points differ in degrees depending on location. Thanks to a narrow orbit of one and a half degree (1.5), we are thus able to solve the flaw of most existing predictive methods based on geocosmics studies, which ultimately prove useless in case of concurrent events.

Extensive information about our methodology can be found in our new ebook

Half-Time Goal Method

10 thoughts on “Our Methodology”

  1. Hi
    This is all very interesting, but in your Tables 2-2b there are not deviations under 0.6, but in your example you calculated 0.5, 0.3 even 0.1. Please can you write down all possible combinations and deviations begin with 0.1 ?

  2. How many examples did you use to find a statiscaly list of the most present midpoints in over 2.5 or under? I use midpoints in predictive sports events, with a dial of 90ºs, with transits, progressions and solar arcs, but use the birth charts of the players/coaches, not horary. I would like to make a statistic not only of the midpoints, but also of other aspects to natal, progressed and solar arc, but the informatic question is getting dificult to overcome.

  3. Hello.
    In the example that you have between Chievo and Roma you have choose only 3 midpoints from which you have conclusion of over /under. The natal chart has a lot of midpoints. Why you select only these three?
    I ask so I can figure out which midpoints to select.
    I appreciate your opinion.

    1. The only midpoints equations that we take into account in our predictions are the ones with the individual point – MC or ASC – as focal point (in the example: ASC=Sun/Moon). The other two midpoints in the example (ASC=Moon/Pluto and ASC=Jupiter/Node) could also be ignored because their deviation % is under 0.6 and therefore not listed in Table 2.

  4. Hello,well I don’t really understand why in the chievo Verona game you choose only 3 midpoints while the other game was more than 3midpoints,can you explain to me more information about it?

Lascia un commento

Il tuo indirizzo email non sarà pubblicato. I campi obbligatori sono contrassegnati *

Questo sito usa Akismet per ridurre lo spam. Scopri come i tuoi dati vengono elaborati.