What's the average numbers now?

[Brent]

I know it used to be 10 named storms, 6 hurricanes(I think) and 2 majors. Does that still hold?

[gatorcane]

Check out Sticky's post a few above your posting:BREAKING NEWS=Dr Gray Upgrades numbers =13/7/3

[caneflyer]

It depends entirely on the period of record chosen. For this purpose NHC likes to begin the record in 1944 (the beginning of the reconnaissance era). For example, to evaluate activity in 2004 with the previous long-term mean, you could use 1944-2003. For the period 1944-2003, the averages are 10.2, 6.0, and 2.6 (TS/H/MH). This total includes subtropicals, which NHC now names exactly the same as tropicals.

Bill Gray uses the period 1950-2000, and I believe excludes subtropicals, so his normals will be a little different.

[StormChasr]

Why, exactly does the average make a difference? IN 1992, Andrew was one of 4 hurricanes, but it was one of the worst natural disaster. Hurricane Glibert, in 1988, absolutely HAMMERED Mexico, but since it did not strike the U.S, it was not given as much press. 1995 was one of the most active seasons ever, in terms of storms, yet 2004 had more landfallers impact Florida, the Carolinas, and the Carribbean (People forget the deaths from Jeanne in Haiti). So, exactly what is the importance of "average" as opposed to the impact of landfall??

[weatherwindow]

averages only serve as benchmarks....they have no predictive value in the short to medium term. obviously, an average smooths the extremes of the long term cycle. if that average rises or falls, it may reflect a possibly significant trend in climatic cycles......each year we roll the dice...however, it is rather helpful to know the "house" odds ....rich

[StormChasr]

I would say that the average of LANDFALLS might be more statistically significant, as opposed to the number of total storms, which are rarely predicted with any level of accuracy.