[CQ-Contest] QSO Penalties

[Kenneth E. Harker]

On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 12:31:05PM -0400, K3BU at aol.com wrote:
> 
> Time to make all logs public and remove the 3 QSO "PENALTY" rule - it is 
> insane, illogical!
> Like if you get speeding ticket, you would get three more so "you learn the 
> lesson?"
> Gimme a break! Let's stop silliness (or insanity) in ham radio!

The 3 QSO penalty rule makes perfect sense to me.  Anything else encourages 
guessing whenever there is uncertainty.  Consider the following options:

0 QSO penalty: If in doubt, it is _always_ to your advantage to guess at a 
  callsign or exchange element.  If you get it wrong, you are no worse off 
  then if you had (correctly) not logged the contact.  On the other hand, 
  there is always the chance that you can get it correct and gain points
  you did not truly earn.

1 QSO penalty: This is the break even point.  If 50% of the time you guess
  correctly, and 50% of the time you guess wrong, you break even.  On average,
  every time you are penalized is offset by some QSO where you guessed 
  correctly.

2 QSO penalty: Here is where taking guesses at callsigns or exchange elements 
  will more likely than not harm your score.  You have to guess right 2/3
  of the time to break even.  To put it another way, when in doubt, you
  have to feel at least 66% certain that your guess is correct before it 
  make sense (in terms of your score) to commit to your guess.

3 QSO penalty: Now you have to guess right 3/4 of the time to break even.
  This is a pretty high threshold to overcome, and I think it does a great
  job of discouraging guessing and sloppy operating, at least among those 
  who care about their score.  This penalty encourages getting it right 
  every time, and not logging those "almost" QSOs.

At the very least, there needs to be a 2 QSO penalty, but a 3 QSO penalty is 
better.

-- 
Kenneth E. Harker WM5R
kenharker at kenharker.com
http://www.kenharker.com/