The contest scoring critiques have shown that the scoring is incoherent.
The technique was ok when the contests were invented... for a few N. East
Coast American stations.
Giving the S. Caribbean incentive to get on the air with extras, did its
job. Slanting the field against low population areas while rewarding
working them worked. Rewarding low power transmitters kept more high
power guys out of top contention, by giving lo pwr something to do.
Do a sociological examination of who and why the rules were made as they
are to see who benefited and who did not.
Now days, more than Americans want to enter and do well... oh oh.
73, Charly
On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 3:37 AM, W5GN <w5gn@mxg.com> wrote:
> If we are going to change scoring, I think working a QRP station should be
> worth 3 points
> TO THE RECEIVING STATION, not to the TRANSMITTING STATION, and 2 points for
> RECEIVING
> a LOW POWER station.
>
> 73
>
> Barry, W5GN
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> Matt Murphy
> Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2015 2:16 PM
> To: k9yc@arrl.net
> Cc: cq-contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Distance-Based Ranking
>
> I propose something like the following approach to calculating QSO points:
>
> 1) One point for every grid square traversed by the signal (the shortest
> path between the two stations).
> 2) Add a point for each of the above grids that are at least 80% covered by
> land.
> 3) Square the result.
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 12:51 AM, Jim Brown <k9yc@audiosystemsgroup.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Tue,11/10/2015 3:15 PM, Ward Silver wrote:
> >
> >> Distance-based scoring really won't work for bands on which there is
> >> a skip zone.
> >>
> >
> > Horse-pucky! Scoring rules determine who wants to work whom. For
> > stations in Zones 3, 11, 12, 13, 29, 30 to have fun in a DX contest,
> > there must be a real desire for other stations to work them. Those
> > zones are remote from population centers, and for the most part,
> > there's only 2-3 countries in a zone. VK is a continent larger than
> > EU, yet only one country multiplier and two zone mults. EU is much
> > smaller than South America, but EU has 5X the country multipliers.
> >
> > Distances DO matter on bands with skip zones. I cited examples in an
> > earlier post. Stations and power being equal, I can work a LOT more
> > mults on more bands in IARU, CQ, and ARRL DX contests from W1 than I can
> from W6.
> >
> > We need FAR more than "ranking" by zone or geographical area. We need
> > a system where an operator in all but the most remote parts of the
> > world is at least in the same contest with those in the Atlantic
> > basin, and where his final score is determined by comparison with his
> > geographic peers. It IS possible to design scoring rules that achieve
> > this. It's like the US Congress -- we simply need the WILL to do it.
> >
> > 73, Jim K9YC
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
--
Charly, HS0ZCW
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|