John NT5C wrote:
>those present rules). The rules reward quantity (# qsos) too much, and
>quality (multipliers) too little. The midwest can compete very effectively
>on multipliers. Usually, we can work larger multipliers than the less
>skilful people on the coasts, who rely more on brute force for qso
>quantity.
This comment plays to the "N" and "N+1" correlation checking also. Present
contests were designed when it was a challenge just to stay on the air.
Today the emphasis is on quality as well as quantity....yet there is no
change in the exchange to lift the bar on quality. Contesters in the past
suggested a form of
token passing that would insure accuracy or "No Contact" recorded.
It seems to me that there is a whole lot of effort spent on checking for
accuracy (over and over) when small energies could be spent designing a self
checking contest exchange that doesn't have to be done every year.
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|