On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 10:19:54AM -0400, n1mu-vhf@rochester.rr.com wrote:
> Folks,
>
> I still feel like there would be some merit to a "Goal-Based" scoring
> method.
>
> See:
> http://tom.2ub.org/docs/N1MU_Proposed_VHF_Contest_Rules.html
My comments:
* The number one, overriding goal of radio contests should be "competition."
In the ideal world, the winner of the contest should be the best-designed
station operated by the highest performing operator(s). The goal of the
contest should be to support that result. Once you start explicitly making
it important to achieve other goals, like "camaraderie" or "activity," even
if they are otherwise laudable in other circumstances, the value of
contesting as a _sport_ is diminished. It's a subtle emotional
distinction, perhaps, but one that I think is a major difference between
VHF contest culture (delining log submissions in the past decade) and HF
contest culture (increasing log submission in the past decade.)
* This approach basically multiplies the number of winners in the contest
by four. The ARRL already awards certificates to like 1/3 of all contest
entrants as it is. In some categories (like SO/P) you'd probably have
80% or more of the entrants winning something.
* The Activity Values and Technology Values you propose are bound to be
very controversial. Just looking at it myself, I don't understand why
a 3.4GHz QSO would be worth only 75% as much "activity value" as a 2.3
GHz QSO - aren't 2.3 GHz stations a lot more common? And why is a 432
MHz phone QSO worth twice the "technology" value as a 432 MHz CW QSO?
That's just bizarre. Yes, I know, they could all be adjusted - but
however it is adjusted, it will always be controversial.
* If it is important to support these four goals, why not have a separate
contest for each goal with scoring systems designed for it? One of the
drawbacks to VHF contesting today is that too many of the contests
are just like each other - there's nowhere near the variety you have in
HF contesting. Gets kinda boring, no?
* I've always thought that one of the ways to encourage activity could be
to have a contest that didn't involve the bands above 432 MHz. If a
contest was only 50-144-222-432, it might attract new contesters who
are currently intimidated by going head-to-head with 10 band stations.
In fact, a 12 hour, 4 band, SO-only contest on a Saturday in like late
May could be really fun - maybe a VHF NAQP...
--
Kenneth E. Harker WM5R
kenharker@kenharker.com
http://www.kenharker.com/
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|