This seems quite do-able. Perhaps use the getscores system to display
the team scores using some kind of pre-registration process to identify
which SOA scores to add?
It would be a great beta-test and probably generate a lot of other ideas
about more stations, extensions to the scoring, specific competition
elements beyond QSO points and multipliers, etc.
But I agree - start small and run a few demos first to see what happens.
73, Ward N0AX
On 12/10/2013 11:18 AM, Gerry Hull wrote:
I have been talking with a few contest friends about the team idea.
We were trying to come up with a really cool team implementation that
would play in the current contest structure, with very minor
modification and no real logger changes.
How about this: SOTA: Single-Op Team Assisted. These are two
single-ops as a team. Team Members can be from anywhere. The team
members are interconnected on the internet, and can pass stations to
each other. They use their own calls. They would be Assisted because
they can share passes, and they can use Spots. They could have a
power overlay. An additional cabrillo line identifies the team.
All QSOs allowed per host contest rules.
No on-air team id -- but perhaps teams could be tracked by real-time
web site.
Can two Americans, one from the west and one from the east beat a
team from Europe and Asia?
Can VY2 + D4 beat OH + 3V?
These and many other combinations that could be tested.
The reason for only two-man teams? It's easy to start with, and
simplifies the rules.
73, Gerry W1VE.
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 12:35 PM, Ward Silver <hwardsil@gmail.com
<mailto:hwardsil@gmail.com>> wrote:
Challenges are as old as contesting - the one with which I am best
acquainted is the Pacific NW Traveling Trophy
(http://www.wwdxc.org/operating/contesting/pacific-northwest-challenge-cup-rules.html)
that creates a year-long competition between the OR/WA/VE7
contesters. This is how they maintain interest and activity in a
propagationally "unique" area that rarely has a shot at
continental top spots. (There are exceptions but we are talking
about the majority of contesters who don't have big stations.)
What is important is the sense of relative equality and
peer-to-peer competition. This sort of organized challenge works
best on a local and regional basis because of the propagation and
scoring variations over bigger areas which have been discussed
widely for the past few days. It doesn't make a lot of sense for
equal stations to challenge each other if they are located in
widely separated locations, for example. Rather than pursue the
unattainable goal of a level playing field, find a level spot on
the field and play there, instead.
On the other hand, competitions of distributed stations connected
over a network, compiling a common log, and working as a single
team as has been proposed can be up to world-wide depending on the
rules. I suggest starting relatively simply with two basic
categories:
- Distributed multi-single: one active transmitter at a time, all
operators can receive, perhaps with a minimum time required
between band changes and a maximum period during which any one
station can make contacts.
- Distributed multi-multi: up to six SOAB stations all combined
into one team with the only restriction being the
one-signal-at-a-time-per-band (or maybe only one-signal-at-a-time).
It would be a strategic decision how to allocate operator and
station resources vs time and band. Do you have six strong
single-band operations or do you allocate the all-band stations
through the day based on propagation or does every station try to
work everything and anything all the time? Or something else
entirely?
Perhaps an on-air team ID is not required - it really doesn't
matter as long as the team manages the log internally to not claim
credit for dupes. (We would need to consider what happens when
more than one team station CQs on a band under different
calls...not simultaneously...but this might not be an issue and
could be part of strategy.) It should be required, though, that
the teams post their composite score and breakdowns in real-time.
Teams should preregister each member under the common name, I
would think.
Sounds like fun to me!
73, Ward N0AX
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com <mailto: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
|