posted July 22, 2010 11:39 PM         

One notable benefit I noticed in the Koch house is that the planets that are on the edge of houses are considered as planets in the next house.

posted July 23, 2010 03:58 AM         

Example:

1st house may be 30 degrees, so a planet which is 5 degree from the next cusp will also be interpreted into the next house.

I am not sure though if we can really do that.

Anyway I once read a thorough explanation about why Koch houses are astronomically and astrologically doubtful.

The calculation:
You take the position of your MIDHEAVEN at the time of your birth and go back in time until the exact position of your midheaven will now be on your ASC.

Then you divide this time-frame by 3; let`s say the Midheaven takes 3 hours to become the ASC. So you check which degree will rise (become ASC) one and two hours before your birth, which gives you the cusp of 11th and 12th house.
The problem with this is, that astrological theory sais that a horoscope is a reflection of the stars / sky AT A PARTICULAR moment in time (your birthmoment), but with this calculation, you actually go back into time BEFORE your birth.

posted July 23, 2010 06:16 AM         

I also tried to use equal and switched back to Placidus.
I find it highly interesting that Scandinavians are using Placidus, too.
After all it is THE most used counterargument against Placidus (and Koch, too btw) that it fails at over 66° N (or S).
Yet, I once made a chart for a friend of mine (who hadn`t been a friend at that time though); she has a chart with ridiculously looking houses.

ASC on 15 Cancer, IC on 14 Leo. LOL
I made two interpretations, one with equal hosuesystem,one with Placidus; I was convinced that she would pick equal as the one that fit her the most.
I was wrong. Despite having such unbalanced houses the interpretation with Placidus was the one that reflected her life "so perfect, it`s being creepy" as she told me.

Still I am sometimes wondering about the astronomical calculation. Is it still in concordance with astrological system?
A birthchart is the chart of the sky at ONE particular moment; the moment that marks the evolvement from independent material nonexistance to independent material / physical existence (the first breath we breathe on our own). It is really ONE moment.
And yet, even the calculation after Placidus uses a "time-sequence" as reference.

Every degree has a "daily-arc". This is the time the Sun needs to move from ASC to DESC, and this timearc is being equally dissected for Placidus house-calculation.
It has the advantage that it doesn`t relate to a moment BEFORE birth / existence, BUT it has the great disadvantage, that it ALSO is NOT related to a single MOMENT in time, but uses the daily ARC, which could be like 6 hours from the moment of your birth (ASC) into the future.

On the other hand the exact length of that daily arc is completeley DEPENDANT on the single moment you drew your first breath / you were born. If you had been born minutes later this daily arc would be a different one.

Now is the question I am chewing on, is that compatible with astrological premise or not?

posted July 23, 2010 07:44 PM         

I like your analyses of the Placidus house. I also believe that the natal chart should be aligned at the exact moment a child is delivered to this world, or taking its first breath. I'm not surprised that switching to different house systems would manipulate the solar arc or ascendant to the moment BEFORE a person is born.

I mostly use the Placidus houses and trust it more than other house systems because it's accurate and it's preferred by most astrologers. However, I have trouble determining which house influences my planets more when the planets are at the end of one house.