Tarot Prediction Experiment, June 2021
My teacher gave me a couple of rules about prediction: Expect a 50/50 success rate, and the reading will be more accurate the closer it is to the time of outcome.
Straight-up prediction can be controversial even among tarot practitioners, yet their patrons expect it. Many folks think prediction is all cartomancy is about. Most people will generally give the tarot somewhat of a pass regarding its entertainment value, but fewer understand the card’s ability to help us explore spiritual and psychological situations. Nevertheless, prediction is one of those things that people will always expect the tarot to do. Like Camelia Elias says, "You are only as good as your last prediction." I agree. If you nail it, you are amazing. If you miss the mark, you suck.
In my month-long experiment, I will attempt to foretell the outcome of various events limited to binary outputs like 'yes/no' or 'win/lose.' I'll try to do at least one every weekday. I won't look up the odds beforehand, but it might be interesting to compare after the fact. Finally, at the end of June, I will evaluate my success. I aim to fare better than the predictable (ironically) 50/50 expectation. I want to see if I can beat the odds and surpass the flip of the coin. Wish me luck!
Videos about predictions can be viewed on the myseflismycards YouTube channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYoEHOwWr4bfTpGz-Eoa0yA/playlists
Not all readings are predictive. The majority of the readings I do are not predictive. They are usually exploratory questions like “What do I need to know about ______?” or “What can I do to improve my chances of successful _______?” Or they are acts of the forging of intent out into the world. Exploratory, spiritual, and magical readings are not measurable by a percentile.
Below the spreadsheet, I list some things I learned about predictive reading during this experiment.
I take opportunities to challenge the norms so I can see for myself if they have value for my practice. Things I have learned in this experiment so far:
-It really does help to be comfortable in your reading environment after all. I tried reading in different locations and under various circumstances. You want to have a cool internal composure so you can read with levelheadedness.
-Watch the games and check-in beforehand. You want to be as in touch with your topic as you can be. See if you can find out in advance who is starting, what jerseys the teams will be wearing, and be aware of what arena they are playing in.
- Read as close to the start of the event as you can. I discovered this was indeed good advice. I didn’t first understand why, however, but now I think I figured it out. It ensures that the knowledge you take into the reading is the most recent knowledge you can have. The nearer the event you are reading for, the most recent knowledge is available. Knowledge is one of the three (so far I cite three) edges of predictive reading.
-Three edges of predictive reading: Knowledge, Equinimity, Sortilege
-Knowledge: Up-to-date, multi-faceted, well-rounded
-Equinimity: Comfortable environment, mitigated biases, presence
-Sortilege: Type, number, and shuffle of cards. Placement and attitude of placement (spread).
-Dispose of anything in the process that introduces useless noise. I don’t just mean sound, I mean anything that isn’t helpful to your reading. When it came to reading NBA playoffs, I realized the court cards served no function so they did not need to be there.
The second week in, I began to list the home team at the top of the page and their cards are displayed as the top set. This represents the home game advantage which is a very real thing, especially since the teams are easing from the empty arena Covid-era back to playing for cheering fans.
-Good reading requires your focus. I found that as soon as my attention was being pulled away from this experiment by the backlog of candle readings that needed to be addressed, my accuracy suffered.
Most of all, this should always have a spirit of fun to it. Enjoyment is an important element of the process.
****I had to close the experiment a little early. I became very busy with readings, and that takes priority. This was fun. I consider this a success, having called 60% of the games correctly. The next time I have some space to try this again, I’d like to see if I can improve my accuracy in predictive settings.****
This was a hard one to call. I went with drive vs. difficulty. If the Nets go in with the right plan, Durant can do most of the offensive work. Those threes have to land. The Bucks will run into trouble if that happens.
This was an interesting spread with a predominance of spades and clubs. This will be a physical game. The escalation of the Clippers game, particularly in terms of defense will overwhelm Utah’s otherwise solid play.
6:15pm Wednesday, June 10: Denver v Phoenix:
Cards say: Phoenix for the win -HIT-
Coin says: Phoenix for the win
I am trying something new with my card format this week. One deck for each team with the courts removed. It worked well for this pull. Let’s see how tomorrow’s big games go.
1:13pm Monday, June 8: Clippers v Nuggets, Game 1:
Interpretation: Clippers for the win -miss-
Coin says: Jazz for the win
This game was a surprise. The arena was packed. It was the first full house since the pandemic started. This Utah crowd was loud and into it. It was disconcerting to see that many people in one place, but I think it pumped up the Jazz because they were jamming.
I started off this experiment hot with four straight hits, but now things are going the other way. My accuracy has dropped to 60%. I am starting to build a theory of the factors involved in prediction of this kind. It seems like three main factors are at work: knowledge, bias, and the sortilege. Also, I am considering removing the courts. I still like the playing cards for this work, but the courts have been distracting at times. Since I am mostly concerned about function, only cards of function should be present.
Part of this experiment has been about trying to find the function of the courts. I’ve tried various assignments, players, coaches, the attitude of the team, even the officials, but the distribution seems disproportionate to the functionality of selecting the winner of a basketball game. I will remove the courts and see how that works.
The readings that have worked out the best are the ones I pulled just before the start-of-game. I have found that I like to be in my studio reading for the game as the players are in shoot-around or taking the floor. I place my mind in the frame of possibility like a player would stoke themselves up in preparation for the first quarter.
1:11pm Monday, June 8: Hawks v 76r’s, Game 2:
Interpretation: Hawks for the win -miss-
Coin says: Hawks for the win
5:38pm Monday, June 7: Nuggets at Suns, Game 1:
Cards say: Suns for the win
Coin says: Nuggets for the win
3:06pm Monday, June 7: Bucks at Nets, Game 2 (BKN leads 1-0):
Cards say: Bucks for the win
Coin says: Nets for the win
11:00am Sunday, June 6: Clippers v Mavericks, Round 1, Game 7:
Cards say: Clippers for the win *Hit
Coin says: Mavericks for the win
4:27 Saturday, June 5: Bucks v Nets, Round 2, Game 1:
Cards say: Bucks for the win. *Miss
Coin says: Bucks for the win
Friday, June 4: Mavericks v Clippers Round 1, Game 6:
Cards say: Clippers for the win *Hit
Coin says: Dallas for the win