There are several simple rules or scoring modifications that can be
implemented without artificially restricting the number of QSOs that
can be made by rovers of any class. I have discussed these earlier,
but they are not my original ideas. The VUAC prefers to propose
incremental changes to the rules, so it may be a long time before we
see these changes implemented.
1. Score and report rover's scores by grid. The total rover's score
would be the sum of all the individual scores from each grid. Rover's
would compete for awards within grids with stationary stations. They
would compete within sections, divisions, and/or regions with other
rovers. Since the exchange is a grid square, it is rather artificial
to report scores by section. This would reduce overall rover scores
substantially, bu tput them more in line with fixed stations. This
scoring suggestion is essentially what was done for the QRP Portable
class prior to establishing the rover class. It has its own
controversy, namely that the same station could win multiple sections,
could even place several times in the top ten, which was one of the
reasons that the rover class was established. However, with all the
rovers in multiple grids, this would not be a problem.
2. Implement distance based scoring. Eliminate grid squares as
multipliers. The 10 GHz contest does this.
3. Give double QSO points for the initial contact with a station. This
will award the stations that work a lot of different stations, without
placing artificial restrictions on the number of QSOs allowed. The 10
GHz contest gives additional points for an initial contest.
4. Establish a minimum distance, say 10 km that a rover must move
before the rover can contact the same station. Again, the 10 GHz
contest does this.
5. Eliminate or reduce the QSO point differential by band.
There is no reason why all of the VHF/UHF contests need to have the
same format and scoring. Here are my suggestions for implementing
these changes.
1. For the UHF contest, implement the 10 GHz rules and scoring as is.
There is no rover controversy in the 10 GHz contest.
2. For the January contest, as there is usually no enhanced
propagation, implement the 10 GHz rules or a variation on them.
3. For the June contest, which essentially becomes a 6M contest when
the band is open, eliminate the QSO point differential for higher band
contacts as they become less important to the total score when all the
activity is concentrated on 6M.
4. For the September contest, implement scoring by suggestion 1 above.
Leave the rest of the rules alone.
Or you can mix and match as you see fit.
Or you can leave things the way they are. That would be OK with me as
well. We can spend the effort instead recruiting new VHF contest ops
and new rovers from the VHF contest community.
I think that we should concentrate on encouraging activity and
implement rules to that end. Trying to level the playing field, or
making things "fair", is an effort in futility.
With open logs, one could analyze previous logs submitted and see how
these rule changes would effect results. Without them we can only
guess. That is a useful. - Duffey
--
KK6MC
James Duffey
Cedar Crest NM
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|