[CQ-Contest] Re: Score Reduction Penalties Are Good Policy

i4jmy at migate.n8it.AMPR.ORG i4jmy at migate.n8it.AMPR.ORG
Thu Nov 12 09:08:56 EST 1998

    N6AA told that WWDX contest analysis is voted to prize the accuracy
  in logging and not only awarding the big logs.
    Well, altough I agree 100% with log checking that makes WWDX results
  quite reasonable and reliable, I see a little "bug", but with a major
  impact, in the actual penalty system.
    I mean that mistakes, independently by their amount, actually bring
  to a nearly linear score reduction.
    In some cases this fact goes exactly against the stated, I think, and
  big logs can anyway compensate big errors.  
    Let me express this concept with an example.

    A log with a final score of 330.000 pts. is sent to WW comitte, but
  after the indicated "processing" it drops to 200.000 pts.
    Another log arrives and is 201.000 pts., but after processing the
  score drops to 199.000 pts.
    By numbers, the first log wins and the second is behind.

    It's nearly sure that the second log did contain less than 1% of
  "original" mistakes and probably was clean by errors on mults, while
  it's very possible that the first was originally wrong by a 10% or
  more, including errors on multipliers.
    I think the first log is actually "judged" as he only did 10 times 1%
  mistakes, while it's deeply different to produce a nearly precise log
  than a quite mistaken one.
    Under the aims to incentivate real 2way qsos and correct loggings,
  doesn't it look the second log to much penalized in respect to the
  first one ?
    Wouldn't it be more proportioned to rise penaltyes as much as the
  mistakes number increase (i.e. 3 removed up to 1% broken calls, 4 up
  to 2% broken, and so on)?

    I think it would be.
    Vy 73,

    Mauri I4JMY, (one of IR4T)

CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list