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

[Gilmer, Mike]

W1HIJ/6 wrote:

	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


This started as a thread (I know, the subject changed) to try to figure out
a way to separate (yup, new category) those with no reasonable CHOICE in
their equipment (antennas mostly).  Now it's being suggested that one get
"penalized" in effect for having the choice and taking advantage of it by
putting up better antennas.  Also, I would think any attempt to handicap
based on ERP must also take into account local terrain, tower height, coax
losses, etc.

PLEASE don't suggest using (only) handicapped scores for competition.  This
would remove almost all incentive for making contest station (antennas
mostly) improvements.  If this is NOT the suggestion, I apologize.

An example of an attempt to equalize scores, in Field Day, the ARRL lumps kW
operations (rare, though they be) and 100W operations into the same category
and "adjusts" the scores by a multiplier factor.  The kW stations don't
stand a chance - the factors used are really inequitable.  In the case of
FD, it doesn't really matter much - not too many crazies want to bother
trying to generator-power a kW operation - but this shows what happens.
Apparently there's a 160m contest with the same problem - to be competitive,
operators must use QRP effectively removing all the "loud" signals.  Gads!
Is this what we want?

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

<snip>

> No additional classes or categories, just a multiplier for the final
> score. 
> All else remains the same.
>  
Uh, which is it, "a series of classes" OR "No additional classes"?

It makes a difference.

73
Mike
N2MG


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