Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+CQ\s+WW\s+Scoring\s+System\s+needs\s+revision\?\s*$/: 44 ]

Total 44 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Scoring System needs revision? (score: 1)
Author: "Martin , LU5DX" <lu5dx@lucg.com.ar>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 09:24:49 -0200
Hello. I believe that discussing whether NA or Caribean stations should get 3 points per QSO instead of two for intra-continent QSOs is okay. But it doesn't solve the biggest factor that cause inequi
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00434.html (8,998 bytes)

2. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Scoring System needs revision? (score: 1)
Author: "Milt -- N5IA" <n5ia@zia-connection.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 07:44:23 -0700
You want to make it better. Distance scoring RULES. A meaningful exchange, ie. Grid Square for base scoring. Also, the band difficulty should be weighted for scoring which would also encourage more a
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00440.html (8,703 bytes)

3. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Scoring System needs revision? (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 08:25:01 -0700
The topic of distance-based scoring comes up consistently and many contesters seem to be in favor of it, but somehow it never gains any traction beyond the Stew Perry. I wonder how many contesters ar
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00446.html (9,710 bytes)

4. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Scoring System needs revision? (score: 1)
Author: Joe <nss@mwt.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 09:26:02 -0600
But distance isn't truly measuring the level of difficulty in making the QSO either, unless the contest happens only on 160, 80, & 40. Otherwise making a QSO from here in the Black hole to South Amer
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00447.html (10,209 bytes)

5. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Scoring System needs revision? (score: 1)
Author: "Martin , LU5DX" <lu5dx@lucg.com.ar>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 13:59:27 -0200
Well. It is clear that those that have invested zillions in building a station with tons of aluminum will not be in favor of such change. But probably things are getting so hot in several aspects of
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00450.html (12,499 bytes)

6. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Scoring System needs revision? (score: 1)
Author: "Martin , LU5DX" <lu5dx@lucg.com.ar>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 14:01:00 -0200
That's a good point. But if you do the math of calculating All Band scores based on distance you will be amazed at how equalizing 1 point per mile or kilometer is. 73 de LU5DX _______________________
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00451.html (12,356 bytes)

7. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Scoring System needs revision? (score: 1)
Author: Aldewey@aol.com
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 11:30:48 -0500 (EST)
Distance based scoring is something that was looked at in detail for ARRL DX contest a couple years ago. While it had it's advocates, there were a couple main concerns that caused us to set it aside
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00457.html (9,492 bytes)

8. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Scoring System needs revision? (score: 1)
Author: W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu@w0mu.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 09:34:59 -0700
I think it is a step in the right direction. Has anyone done a comparison of logs based on the current scoring and then converting it to distance based. What difference would it make in your scores.
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00460.html (11,262 bytes)

9. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Scoring System needs revision? (score: 1)
Author: "Martin , LU5DX" <lu5dx@lucg.com.ar>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 15:29:54 -0200
Hi Al. The analysis you mention was done for the ARRL and it's sort of domestic. I've done the analysis in the past for CQ WW and it was really leveling at a world wide basis. Logging soft doesn't ne
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00464.html (11,157 bytes)

10. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Scoring System needs revision? (score: 1)
Author: Rudy Bakalov <r_bakalov@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 10:55:04 -0800 (PST)
If the software already supports Stew Perry and/or Makrothen, then it already supports exchanging grid squares and distance based scoring. N1MM, WinTest, and WriteLog already do so. Rudy N2WQ _______
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00467.html (12,185 bytes)

11. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Scoring System needs revision? (score: 1)
Author: Diego Dimunzio <ddimunzio@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 16:48:26 -0200
Hello All, Here my five cents about this topic, based on CQWW CW claimed scores, you can take any other contest and do the same analysis, have a quick look to the claimed scores. Let's take for insta
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00468.html (13,448 bytes)

12. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Scoring System needs revision? (score: 1)
Author: "Rick Kiessig" <kiessig@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2013 09:00:12 +1300
I would like to add my support to those who are suggesting distance-based scoring. The way things are now, stations that are located in a different multiplier (DXCC/zone), close to a major population
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00471.html (10,340 bytes)

13. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Scoring System needs revision? (score: 1)
Author: "Rick Kiessig" <kiessig@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2013 09:36:43 +1300
I think it's a mistake to look at distance-based scoring strictly as a measure of effort to complete a QSO. Even though it's a much better measure than DXCC or Zone, that's not the real intent, IMO.
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00473.html (10,672 bytes)

14. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Scoring System needs revision? (score: 1)
Author: Aldewey@aol.com
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 19:13:28 -0500 (EST)
Martin; You are right. We looked primarily at the affect on the North America scores in ARRL DX because, of course, the world works North American in that event. I could see where those who participa
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00488.html (12,202 bytes)

15. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Scoring System needs revision? (score: 1)
Author: "Bill Parry" <bparry@rgv.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 22:42:24 -0600
Dave, The reason that it never gains traction is that the ones who like change talk about it after every CQWW contest and the ones that don't see any need to continually discuss the issue since the c
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00489.html (12,698 bytes)

16. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Scoring System needs revision? (score: 1)
Author: John <jfsiepmann@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 19:48:46 -0700
And factor in antenna height & gain. :) Maybe not. John, N9NA _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/lis
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00490.html (10,703 bytes)

17. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Scoring System needs revision? (score: 1)
Author: Pat Rundall <pat@n0hr.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2013 21:44:05 -0600
A couple of years ago I took a crack at an alternative scoring system using Excel to see how well it would work. Essentially, points would be distance based from your lat/lon to the center of the DX
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-12/msg00003.html (11,486 bytes)

18. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Scoring System needs revision? (score: 1)
Author: K6OK <jvarn359@googlemail.com>
Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2013 10:11:50 -0800
for major contests, and what their reasons would be.<< Distance alone is not well correlated with QSO difficulty nor the length of openings between any given grid pair. It is possible, IMHO, to devel
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-12/msg00008.html (7,906 bytes)

19. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Scoring System needs revision? (score: 1)
Author: "XV4Y (Yan)" <xv4y@nature-mekong.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2013 14:14:08 +0700
Hi Martin, I don't we need to go as far as the gridsquare : - first if the participant does not send log it is hard to guess accurately - second as many people do, I think that HF QSO "difficulty" is
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-12/msg00024.html (9,498 bytes)

20. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Scoring System needs revision? (score: 1)
Author: Fabio I4UFH <i4ufh@libero.it>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2013 09:38:21 +0100
Hi Guys, Even it will be impossible to equalize the world, with the right equation, i have one more simple idea, that i didnt show up, this year, apologies if if has still be discussed in the past :
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-12/msg00026.html (12,022 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu