[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] The two/four-point rule in WPX

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] The two/four-point rule in WPX
From: Richard F DiDonna NN3W <richnn3w@verizon.net>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 09:38:13 -0400
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Unfair would be the fact that I can work a station 2300 miles away in California and I don't receive a single point for that QSO. You, on the other hand, can work about a dozen different countries with 500 miles of Helsinki. If you're in Germany, that number increases to about 40 countries.

So, please consider the uproar as to who benefits over whom with respect to geography.

73 Rich NN3W

On 4/10/2014 8:02 AM, Kim Östman wrote:
Hi John,

Removing the exception simply brings the NA Caribbean stations to everybody
else's level and rules.

If such playing under equal rules is seen as "unfair," then the problem lies
with the basic scoring system, and you can't fix that with this kind of
exception for just a privileged few.

Again, there are two very distinct and separate things at play here:

1) The basic continental-divide scoring system
2) The 2/4-point NA exception to it

Most agree that the first one is fundamentally flawed. But it is so
entrenched that I'm afraid we will not see it changed before our hobby dies

Thus I'm focusing only on the second one. We can’t put band-aid on the big
problem by maintaining a parochial exception that makes it even more
"unfair" for everybody else. Numerous examples can be shown of how this has
distorted contest results (beyond the basic system) and reversed final

In an event that purports to be a competition and to be worldwide, I think
this piece of basic logic should be patently obvious. I'm happy to say that
private communications around this thread are acknowledging this fact, even
from among the beneficiaries.

I'm still hoping to hear official answers to the two questions posed


CQ-Contest mailing list

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