[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] DREAMING

To: Jim Neiger <n6tj@sbcglobal.net>, Jimk8mr@aol.com,CQ-Contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] DREAMING
From: Andrei Nevis <v49a@yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 14:13:05 -0700 (PDT)
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
I would gor for a Grid Square points and no multipliers, something like in RTTY 
MAKROTHEN Contest. More distant QSO - more points you get, something like that, 
  Anyway, so many people so many opinions.
  See you from HQ3R in the Contest, Jim and all.
  73's Andrei EW1AR-NP3D

Jim Neiger <n6tj@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
  Following N4ZR's admonition, I'll re-label this notion as DREAMING.

A scoring system for CQ WW DX contests that I think could really work is 
idealistically simple:

QSO's in YOUR country 1 point

QSO's EVERYWHERE else 3 points

Encourages activity: (this would be good)

Removes flagrant biases tied to continental boundaries

No longer penalizes Asians who must work someone thousands of kilometers 
distant for one point (maybe encourages our JA friends to participate again?)

Eliminates unfair advantages that Zone 33, 35, 36, 09, 10 have today

Maybe encourages more expeditions to rarely-on Caribbean and Central American 


Meanwhile, I'll look for you all from Hawaii KH7Q 
(or is that KH7 Qure??) on 20 meters next weekend. 
Sometimes there's maybe more about contests than points? I'll contemplate that 
while making the drive along Oahu's beautiful north shore.

Vy 73

Jim Neiger N6TJ

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Jimk8mr@aol.com 
To: n6tj@sbcglobal.net ; CQ-Contest@contesting.com 
Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2006 7:56 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Real Time Scoreboards

In a message dated 10/20/2006 8:09:10 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, 
n6tj@sbcglobal.net writes:

Why not REALLY improve the contest by seriously considering remedying the 
ancient, unfair, archaic "points per QSO vs. your continent" nonsense.

There are some things in the world, like the USA Electoral College and the CQWW 
1-2-3 point system, that would never be designed into a new system, but with 
which we seem to be stuck forever. So it appears voters in Wyoming and Delaware 
and contesters in Zone 9 and Zone 33 will continue to be more equal than the 
rest of us.

Unlike elections, however, in ham radio contests there need not be only one 
winner. There can be multiple winners based on multiple sets of rules. Just 
take the raw material of what a person worked (from a Cabrillo log) , and score 
it in several ways.

Obviously, it would still be scored in the "CQWW Classic" mode, using today's 

>From there use one's imagination. My suggestion is a scoring system where 
>points are based on zone to zone distances. The point values would not need 
>not be integers, so 1.6 or 2.226 points for a qso would be possible and 
>normal. For example, something like

QSO Points = 1 + (Distance/10000)

where Distance is the zone center to zone center distance in kilometers.

So qso points would vary from 1 (your own zone) to about 3 (at the antipodes). 
Score it up with the current multiplier structure, and you have the results of 
the "CQWW 21st Century" competition.

Having done the work of preparing logs for processing, dupe/bust checking, 
etc., there would be very little extra work to produce an alternate set of 
scores, with results published online. 

Watsa OMs?

73 - Jim K8MR
CQ-Contest mailing list

BEST 73'S 
  WAS RTTY #455

Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ 
countries) for 2¢/min or less.
CQ-Contest mailing list

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