[CQ-Contest] Tossing meaningless categories [was: Log checking questions]

Radiosporting Fan radiosporting at yahoo.com
Fri Dec 16 06:17:44 EST 2005

> NX5M:
> > I think it might be time to just do away
> > with the packet assisted category
> > and let everyone do whatever they want.

I agree.  As long as we tell others what we're doing
so that scores mean something.  Here's what I mean...

We human beings try to categorize everything.  We look
for order where it doesn't exist, or exists only
loosely at best.

There are similar (to spotting) issues raised whenever
we create artificial categories.  For instance, "Why
is 99-watts to a 4/4/4/4 considered Low Power, while
101-watts to a dipole is High Power?"

One way to address this dilema is to stop categorizing
based on artificial groupings.  Another is to
establish categories that really matter.  Lastly, show
all scores in one, big list that is sorted highest to
lowest with listings that show the factors that most
impact a score: Frequency (if a single-band event),
Location, Operator Count, Operating Duration, Max RF
output, Max Antenna Gain.

Seeing such a listing would go far to normalize
several things.  Why?  Because you should *expect* a
QRP signal to score QRP points, a 5-operator M/O to
score more than a 2-operator M/O and a 99-watt 4/4/4/4
to score more than a 101-watt dipole.

My thoughts,
Ev, W2EV

Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list