Interesting "fix" for the problem.
But instead of sending "00", just send your regular zone (it might be
a mult for the CQing station) and let the award points be added
during log checking by the CQWW team. I had at least one new USA zone
answer my CQ (zone 3 on 10M).
The scoring could be added the same as the QRP award points are added
for the Stew Perry Contest.
But this does not really fix the real problem of what to because of
the high number of stateside QSOs being forced on contest stations in
the midwest.
I decided to look at our multi-multi logs from the 2005 CQWW Phone
Contest for some real data.
From the Austin area we made 3248 QSOs in the M/M category. We had a
good group of experienced contesters to do the operating. We made
4,862,220 score and finished 10th per the 3830 reporting behind
W4MYA, who had 5.3M points. We tried hard to make the best score we could.
I checked our logs and found that we had 613 USA QSOs for an
astonishing 19% of our overall QSO total. That is outrageously high
and there seems to be nothing we can do about it. Just another
penalty for not living on the East Coast.
I took this one step further and gave each of the USA QSOs one QSO
point and recalculated our score. This brought our score to the 5.2M
point range. This was not enough for us to catch W4MYA and move up a
notch in the M/M scoring. Our place in the 3830 standings stayed
exactly the same, at 10th place.
So tell me again how getting 1 QSO point for every same country QSO
is going to dramatically alter the flavor of the CQWW Contest. But
this time try to convince me with some real data.
73, Richard - K5NA
At 03:37 11/30/2005, Ted Bryant wrote:
>Excuse me for repeating myself, but when I posted this earlier NQ4I
>was the only one who picked up
>on what I had proposed. (unusual for this group, not even a flame or
>two) So, let me attempt to
>state this a little better:
>
>Regearding ZERO point QSO's:
>I always thought it a little odd that in a contest where scores
>matter, a perfectly legitimate QSO
>between two stations could result in no points scored for either. In
>the CQWW the root cause of this
>angst with zero points is due to stations needing their own
>country/zone multiplier. So they pounce
>on some CQing station who has already probably worked several in the
>callers country/zone and
>neither get any point credit from the encounter.
>
>The discussions about 1 point for same country/zone QSO's is an
>attempt to fix this, but has the
>risk of changing the "flavor" of the CQWW and from recent comments I
>do not believe anyone wants
>that.
>
>But, is it right for the calling station to get credit for a
>country/zone mult while the CQing
>station
>"wastes" his time being a good sport and gets nothing?
>
>So, here is a proposal:
>
>Let's reward each station for the QSO. Let the calling station get
>multiplier credit for the
>same-country/zone (but zero points as it is now) but the CQing
>station gets 1 point for the QSO. To
>let the CQing station know that the caller needs the
>same-country/zone multiplier, let the caller
>send "00" (zero-zero) as the zone in his exchange. So everyone gets
>1 point for each "00" zone they
>work and those who work stations in their same-country/zone get the
>multiplier but zero points.
>
>I can hear the logging programmers (and log checkers) groaning now :((
>
>73, Ted W4NZ
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>CQ-Contest mailing list
>CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
k5na@texas.net
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|