[CQ-Contest] Is it time to reevaluate CQWW Scoring Rules?

[John Geiger]

Or just 2 points per QSO, regardless of distance, continent, or country.

73s John AA5JG

--- On Fri, 12/4/09, Dick Green WC1M <wc1m73 at gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Dick Green WC1M <wc1m73 at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Is it time to reevaluate CQWW Scoring Rules?
> To: "'David Kopacz'" <david.kopacz at aspwebhosting.com>, cq-contest at contesting.com
> Date: Friday, December 4, 2009, 7:40 PM
> Anamolies like this are inevitable
> with a continent-based scoring system. I
> think the only way to fix it is to use a scheme based on
> actual distance,
> such as one QSO point per 1000 kilometers of distance, or
> something similar.
> It would be relatively simple to implement such a system
> with today's
> computer-based logging and log-checking programs.
> 
> 73, Dick WC1M
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David Kopacz [mailto:david.kopacz at aspwebhosting.com]
> > Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 12:33 PM
> > To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> > Subject: [CQ-Contest] Is it time to reevaluate CQWW
> Scoring Rules?
> > 
> > What's wrong with this picture?
> > 
> > EF8M(RD3AF)   
>    7374   131   409 
>   48 11,888,100
> > V47NT(N2NT)   
>    7402   135   457 
>   48 11,231,424
> > 
> > Let's see, V47NT has more Q's more zones and
> significantly more
> > countries, but a lower score!
> > 
> > So basically, he out-performed EF8M in all aspects and
> still loses.
> > 
> > I think it's time for an evaluation of the scoring
> rules.
> > 
> > What do you think?
> > 
> > David ~ KY1V
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>