Its an interesting idea. Obviously this would have to be weighted by
QSOs and/or other metrics to make it meaningful. I.e. a 100% accurate
score is trivial with 10 QSOs, much harder with 5000 QSOs :)
Similarly, a contest like WPX or Sweepstakes would be more prone to
errors than CQWW, for example.
There could be all sorts of metrics that could be published, and if
not for competition, just for informational purposes I think it would
be very cool. In the age of cheap disk and compute power, this would
be relatively easy to calculate, I think.
See R5GA's most excellent rate website: http://rate.r5ga.com/ -
another metric that could be used.
See you in the pileups,
Jeff N6GQ, YN2AA
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 9:57 AM, James Hadlock <jrhadlock74@msn.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: James Hadlock<mailto:jrhadlock74@msn.com>
>
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com<mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2014 8:56 AM
>
> Subject: Accuracy Top Ten Box
>
>
>
>
> How about contest organizers publish as part of the general results a Top Ten
> box for Accuracy? We already have individual accuracy reports for the major
> contests - it would open a whole new form of competition.
>
>
>
> Jim K7WA
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|