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 the discussion
that it would be reasonable to think in terms of giving what they deserve
to the vast majority of entrants who make these weekend events possible and
not to the big egos that try to win a plaque or set a fake record at any
cost.
What still keeps amazing me is the fact that they believe they are actually
"wining" something. Most of us are contesting old farts, most of us know
each other pretty well. It would be really nice to see a change of mind in
us all.
Imagine of a CQ WW DX when people from really far away places can
comfortably run (or at least less uncomfortably) on the bands because
everyone is playing by the rules allowing to reduce the chaotic, sky rocket
high wall to wall generated by decawatts.
Or where the rules privilege the effort it takes to make a QSO.
Not to mention if rules privileged proficiency like in the NA Sprints...
(but this is less likely applicable to a contest like CQ WW). The previous
points are pretty applicable though.
Best 73.
Martin, LU5DX
On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 12:25 PM, David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>wrote:
>
> 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 are actually
> AGAINST distance-based scoring for major contests, and what their reasons
> would be.
>
> 73,
> Dave AB7E
>
>
>
> On 11/29/2013 7:44 AM, Milt -- N5IA wrote:
>
>> 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 activity on the lesser used 'edge' bands.
>>
>> Also, the power levels should be weighted a la SPDC such that all scores
>> can have somewhat of a direct comparison. Awards would still be by
>> category, but scoring could be directly compared by HP to LP to QRP.
>>
>> Mis dos centavos, de Milt, N5IA
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: Martin , LU5DX
>> Sent: Friday, November 29, 2013 4:24 AM
>> To: CQ-Contest
>> Subject: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Scoring System needs revision?
>>
>> SNIP
>>
>> Even more. It would encourage for example EUs to be more active on 10 m
>> during solar minimun to make as many intra-continent Qs as possible.
>> It would encourage SA stations also to make as many intra-continents Qs on
>> 160 and 80, bands that right now show a very little activity from this
>> part
>> of the world.
>>
>> SNIP
>>
>> Vy 73.
>>
>> MM LU5DX.
>>
>>
>>
>> -----
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 2014.0.4259 / Virus Database: 3629/6876 - Release Date: 11/28/13
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|