# [CQ-Contest] Handicaps, etc. was CC&R Category

W1HIJCW at aol.com W1HIJCW at aol.com
Wed Sep 27 03:16:29 EDT 2000

```In a message dated 09/26/2000 12:15:59 Pacific Daylight Time,
N5NW at midsouth.rr.com writes:

> One idea that surfaces consistently is that we compete against ourselves.
>  The only other sport I can think of where that holds true is golf.  Perhaps
>  bowling.  But in golf we have two concepts that are absent from radio --
the
>  concept of "average" (par) and the concept of "handicap".  Are either of
>  these concepts transportable to radio?
>
Hi Marty ---

My thoughts as well --- in fact here's part of the message I sent to Bill
Fisher with a copy to the reflector, but which never made it onto the list ---

I've often thought that some sort of adjustment to scores might be logically
based on an evaluated ERP factor. For example: take an average station with
150W, a triband antenna for the high bands, and usual wires for the low
bands. Set that as a "standard" with a factor of 1. All other stations would
be compared against that standard and a factor calculated which would be
applied to the final score. Example: if the station has only a dipole(s) on
the high bands, but all else is the same, then the overall erp is reduced by
let's say 4 dB. That would lead to a factor to be the multiplier for the
final score of maybe 1.2. Conversely, if the station has a 3 by 5 stack of
tribanders, the erp would go up by perhaps 6 dB and the resulting multiplier
would be something like 0.8

It seems to me that with some creative statistics we could come up with a
series of classes that the competitor would choose among.

What do you think, might this be a way to approach the problem?

No additional classes or categories, just a multiplier for the final score.
All else remains the same.

I like your idea of par --- it makes a nice target.

73, Bill, W1HIJ (/6)

--
CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/