[CQ-Contest] Level playing fields, heads of pins, and so on

[B. Scott Andersen]

Categories of contests do no necessarily "level the playing field" but
can instead provide meaningful groupings of similarly equipped and
capable stations. We have power categories for this purpose as
HP stations are likely to be heard more easily than QRP stations, for
example, and I don't believe that there has been any agitation to
eliminate that distinction. Such distinctions allow for apples-to-apples
comparisons between contestants.

In chess players have ratings and are grouped per those ratings.
Inexperienced players (and I would be listed among them) have
low ratings typically under 1200. Experienced club players have
ratings of 1800 or 2000. Those at the top of the pile have ratings
of 2200-2500 or even more.

The rating system provides a measure for the expectation of victory.
It also helps tournament organizers have tiers of competition with
awards for winning each tier. Class A players (1800-1999) typically
play in a different section than Class D (1200-1399) players.  All
players want to increase their rating and move to a higher class,
but competition and play is scheduled chiefly between peers.

In radio contesting there are traditional categorizations which are
well accepted including the power category (HP, LP, QRP) and
number of operators (SO, MS, MM). Assisted vs. unassisted has
also been added. The question now becomes what additional
categories, if any, should be provided?

Such additional categories would not diminish the competition
between the top operators. Just as the top players in a chess
tournament battle away without regard to the lowly club players
or beginners, top contesters will continue to push the envelope.
Additional categories such as the "tribander/wires" or "rookie"
simply provide non-top-tier participants with a means of gauging
their efforts against those of their peers, much like the rating
system does for chess.

I'm not suggesting that categories be created so finely that the
each specific situation be addressed. I'm suggesting that there
exists a range of capabilities that can be crisply categorized in
a few categories that would assist non-top-tier competitors with
assessing their efforts against those of their peers.

Perhaps these additional categories would only be applicable
to LP or QRP entries. They could be as simple as

* tribander / wires (as CQ already defines it)
* single wire antenna only

And, as is already done by the IOTA contest, participation time
could also be subdivided for 12, 24, or 48 hours. Larger contests
are largely scored by computers. Let's put them to work!

The purpose of this is to encourage contest participation,  not by
"giving stuff away", but by offering gradated points of entry into
this world and providing participants with a meaningful measure
of their performance against those with equivalent constraints.
Administrated properly, top-tier contesters will hardly notice a
difference--except, hopefully, that more "little fish" are  
participating.

-- Scott (NE1RD)

B. Scott Andersen  | "Magic is real, unless declared integer."
bsandersen at mac.com | -- The collected sayings of Wiz Zumwalt
Acton, MA (NE1RD)  | http://www.bsandersen.com