Is anyone familiar with this? I used to do Western until I discovered Vedic/Sidereal.

According to Western astrology, I'm a Virgo but I never quite resembled one and I always thought that was odd. According to Sidereal though, I'm a Leo and that makes a lot more sense to me. Turns out I have Virgo ASC instead. It's quite ironic since in a Western chart I have Venus in Leo and I had always identified myself more with the characteristics with Leo than Virgo.
Also, this has made me realize that the people I know might be another sign instead. For example, I know a lot of Gemini people but only half of them are true Geminis. Some of them are actually Taurus and the airy influence seems to lie in their other planets being in Gemini instead. So this is something I've noticed while comparing Western and Sidereal charts.

What are your thoughts on this?

And for those of you who don't know yet:
Sidereal astrology is the system of astrology used by some Western and all Jyotish astrologers who base their interpretation around the use of the sidereal zodiac. Its primary feature is that the signs of the zodiac align to the sky constellations of the same name. The signs therefore run between dates which are different from the tropical zodiac used in the West. For example, Aries runs from about March 21 to April 20 in the tropical zodiac but extends from April 14 to May 14 in the sidereal(although the precise dates may vary depending on the sidereal system used).

The difference between sidereal and tropical astrology is in the opinion whether the system as defined by Ptolemy in the 2nd century should be fixed to the seasons, i.e. the orientation of the Earth relative to the solar system, or to the background stars, i.e. the orientation of the Earth relative to the galaxy. Tropical astrology chooses the former, sidereal astrology the latter option.

Some sidereal astrologers denounce tropical astrologers for failing to relate to the "actual heavens," seeing in this a fundamental degeneration of the subject.

While the practitioners of Hindu astrology claim to be practicing astrology according to the true constellational placements of the planets, Sun, Moon, etc., this is not strictly true. The zodiacal constellations are not organized into neat packets of stars that cover exactly 30 degrees of the ecliptic. The zodiacal constellations are irregular. Thus, when Linda Johnsen, a respected American Vedic astrologer, says, in her book A Thousand Suns, in essence that what you see is what you get, this is not really true. The ayanamsa does take the heavenly bodies back to a much closer place in the actual constellations, but it is not the whole story. Diana K. Rosenberg has done considerable work and writing on this.