Wow. This is deja vu. I was reading a NCJ from 1984 or sometime like that
on the Metro and this same suggestion was made then - oh, yeah - by N6TJ
And I think the response was the same too. CQWW becomes the intra-Europe
73 Rich NN3W
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Neiger" <email@example.com>
To: <Jimk8mr@aol.com>; <CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2006 12:04 PM
Subject: [CQ-Contest] DREAMING
> 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
> Eliminates unfair advantages that Zone 33, 35, 36, 09, 10 have today
> Maybe encourages more expeditions to rarely-on Caribbean and Central
> American countries?
> 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: firstname.lastname@example.org ; 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,
> email@example.com writes:
> Why not REALLY improve the contest by seriously considering remedying
> 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 rules.
> 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
CQ-Contest mailing list