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 entity's lat/lon. As some
had said that polar paths would skew the results, I added a polar path
scaling factor to allow you to see what that would look like (of course,
you could omit it as well).
So, here's the idea... various users can enter their lat/lon to see how
many points each entity would net where the points are = 1 + distance
points + polar path points
Using this system, from my QTH in Iowa, a QSO with Sri Lanka would yield
6.69 points, while a VE QSO would be merely 1.24 points.
There's a tab that compares the various points in the distance/points
system by region. For example, West Coast US vs Midwest vs East Coast.
The system would be relatively easy to implement in N1MM, Writelog, etc.
Here's the link to the spreadsheet.
and the original discussion:
Take a look at it, enter your own QTH lat/lon, play with the variables and see
if you can find a distance scoring system that works.
Perhaps distance based scoring won't happen for CQ WW - but maybe someday a
high profile contest will pick it up.
On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 1:13 PM, <email@example.com> wrote:
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 09:34:59 -0700
> From: W0MU Mike Fatchett <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Scoring System needs revision?
> Message-ID: <5298C233.firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> 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. Would
> it change the scores of the top competitors. If the answer is yes to
> that question you may have your answer to why this is not being accepted
> or talked about.
> Those at the top like it there.
> Mike W0MU
> On 11/29/2013 8:25 AM, David Gilbert 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.
CQ-Contest mailing list