W6WRT said:
"Finding a way is easy - create a handicap, just like in golf. Average out
scores of different areas over many contests over many years and come up with a
multiplication factor."
I think golf is a good analogy to consider, but handicapping isn't the whole
story.
The purpose of handicapping in golf is to allow players of widely varying skill
levels to enjoy a contrived form of competiton in casual play. Better players
'give strokes' to their less skilled competition. It also allows
player-leveling in various forms of team play. If you ever play any golf of
this type, you know that the awards ceremony usually recognizes both 'low
gross' and 'low net' scorers. Which award would you prefer to win?
This model does not exist in any form of truly competitive golf. A player wins
or loses a tournament based on gross score. He/she also rises and falls in the
seasonal rankings based on the same numbers. In golf, there are definitely
'unfair' advantages that accrue to certain players. A player who enters a
tournament played on his 'home course' has a tremendous advantage for that
weekend. But, the professional playing field is leveled through mechanisms like
the PGA Tour, a series of scheduled events of which certified players must take
part in a large number in order to maintain their ranking. There is some
flexibility, though, and players will strategically choose which events to miss
based on the likely impact on their ranking.
Another factor that goes into player handicapping is called 'course rating'. A
difficult course gets a higher rating than an easier course. When you submit a
score to be included in your handicap, you must also specify the course par and
slope, which contribute to the course rating. A good performance on a tough par
72 course will have more impact on handicap than the same performance on an
easy one.
So, perhaps this IS an interesting model for contesting. Using both
methodologies in our sport could be a very effective way to increase
competition, identify our global stars, and recognize those who perform well
for their level of skill. Formalized handicapping on a contest-by-contest
basis, using past scores in that contest might be an interesting way to
increase competition - particularly at the 'mid levels' of skill and
experience. Recognizing high gross scores also makes sense. And what about a
seasonal 'Contesting Tour', in which competitors must commit to several
'majors'? Can we create non-handicapped and handicapped seasonal rankings in
this way?
How about identifiying contest 'par' and 'rating' for some of our major events?
Should these numbers have regional values? Can we interest any of the really
smart numbers-guys among us [Ken, Kelly, Pat] to take a look at this?
Jim Idelson K1IR
email k1ir at designet.com
web http://www.designet.com/k1ir
_______________________________________________
See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather
Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any questions
and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|