CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

EQUALISED DX Contest

Subject: EQUALISED DX Contest
From: sylvan@skatter.usask.ca (Sylvan Katz)
Date: Thu Oct 29 21:54:40 1992
EQUALIZED DX Contest - OR - CONTESTING IN THE YEAR 2000

(This is a long note - if you don't have the time to read it now
please comeback to later - SYLVAN VE5ZX).

I would like to open a discussion which examines the possibility of
creating an international DX contest that is #equalized# - by that I
mean a contest that gives operators of equal skills but vastly
different operating environments an equal chance to win.

By of background, I have been involved in contesting - primarily CW -
since the mid 1960's - first as part of a pair of operators (myself
VE5ZX and a friend VE5UF) from the university club station VE5US -
some of you may remember that station. I left ham radio for a number
of years but returned in the mid 1980s to operate as a single operator
station under my own call and from various European locations.

Operating contests in VE5 land is interesting. First, it is located in
the center of the 'auroral blackhole'. Second, it is located a long
distance from any major population density and third it is rare to
hear a DX station on 80m (From G land I use to regularly work the east
coast with 100 watts and a sloper).

Over the years we have tried everything from triband 6 element yagis
at 120 ft, to 4 element, long boom triband quads at 120 feet on the
high bands and from dipoles to phased verticals on 40 and 80m. Believe
me it is impossible to be competitive as a multiband operation - we
have tried for close to three decades. I must admit that VE5UF has
shown that it is possible to be internationally competitive on 10m -
but the window of opportunity is limited and each of us only has a
life expectancy that is about 10 solar cycles long.

I am sure there are many of you at other QTHs that have the same
problem. AND in addition many of you, like me have neither the
financial resources or real estate to put up stacked arrays.

Of course there is the old arguement that what you should try better
your score each time - compete against yourself. Last year I had a
long discussion with Al (G3FXB) and Bill (N4AR) about this philosophy
(the day after the FOC dinner in a quaint English pub in Sussex near
AL's QTH).  Personally, this arguement doesn't hold water. It seems to
be based on the idea that it is too difficult to figure out how to
construct an #equalised# contest or a plea that one should not 'rock
the boat'. Is DX contesting that sacred? Any how I am going to give it
a try and see what kind of inventive ideas we as a community of
contesters can come up with.

I have thought about this problem for many years. At one time it
appeared that an #equalised# scoring system would be too difficult to
implement. First because it was computationally too difficult and
second because good propagation data was hard to come by. This is no
longer true. BY the year 2000 almost ever contester in the world will
have a PC so the computational problems will not be a barrier. Also
reliable propagation data is available. It may not be available aprior
to the contest but is definitely available post-contest. In
otherwords, it could be possible, although not necessarily desirable,
that a contest log is submitted on diskette and a propagation
multiplier is applied at contest headquarters - now won't that be
novel!

I don't want to entertain you with my international contest design but
rather I would like now to throw out some observations for discussion
and debate.

Let us assume that there is no way to account for the fact that one
operator use a memory keyer, K1EA on a PC or a straight key. OR that
one operator has a voice keyer and the other suffers through the pains
of a sore throat. OR that one opertor has a packet system which
provide an alert of new multipliers and the other doesn't. Let's stay
with more basic issues and assume that what we are after is a way to
compare operating skills not financial resources or geographical
location. Furthermore let us assume that it is not imperative to stay
with the notion that a multiplier has to include a country, zone or state - 
perhaps it uses a grid notion like those used in VHF contests.

It seems to me that an equalised multiplier might be developed around
three simple parameters.

1. Effective radiated power (transmitter output and antenna gain)

2. Distance between the stations making an exchange

3. Propagation condition (perhaps only evaluated by high, mid and low
   latitude).


It is at this point I will end my contribution to this topic. BUT I
sincerely hope that we can let our imaginations run wild. Let us try
be creativity and as a community of contesters dreaming up a
#equalised# contest. A contest that would encourage a skilled operator
with a 100 watts and a dipole to compete seriously because he or she
knew they had a chance of competing fairly in international DX contest
against an east coast station with a KW and stacked monobanders
on 150 ft towers.

Sylvan Katz
VE5ZX - SYL


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>