[CQ-Contest] [wrtc2014] WRTC Category Weighting Factor

[Martin , LU5DX]

On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 10:23 PM, Chris Plumblee
<chris.plumblee at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Syl,
...
>
> The reality of our hobby is that the best measure of who is the best
> operator is who can score best in the single op categories, and the
> category with the most serious entries and the most competition on a
> regional, national, and international basis is almost universally single
> op, high power. The scoring weight for single op low power was adjusted
> upward this year in an attempt to be more equitable, as Dan pointed out.
>
> ....


Hello Chris.
Your opinion is solely based in your own perception of reality.
But if you do the math (see below) your statement seems not to
accurately represent it (reality).
I did not do the numbers for LP in this case, because I wanted to show
the case of an even less rated entry category (in terms of WRTC
selection criteria), that is, SOAB(A) HP, which has a weighting factor
of 0.8
Raw data was taken from the great site http://www.pileup.ru
More precise calculations can be done using the organizer's score data
base with final numbers.

It would be really interesting if Valery (pileup.ru) or the contest
organizers can provide the raw DB data to manipulate it as needed to
start a solid statistical analysis about competitiveness and other
aspects as well.

2011 CQ WW DX SSB total number of entries SOAB HP: 999
Total sum of Claimed scores for SOAB HP: 879,495,650
Average points per station in SOAB HP (Total sum of claimed points /
(total number of logs - checklogs) = 879,495,650 /  (999 - 41) =
918,053.9144


2011 CQ WW DX SSB total number of entries SOAB(A) HP: 805
Total sum of  Claimed scores for SOAB (A) HP: 751,417,601 points.
Average points per station in SOAB (A) HP (Total sum of claimed points
/ (total number of logs - checklogs) = 751,417,601  / (805 - 49) =
993.938.6257

According to N0AX's formula for determining Competitiveness of a
category, that is,
Average of top ten scores / top score (in a given class)

We can easily determine that:
In the 2011 CQ WW DX

SSB SOAB HP has a Competitiveness index of: 0,740468333
whereas
SSB SOAB (A) HP has a Competitiveness index of: 0,672518322 (In this
case the competitiveness index is actually deviated by the score of
one station P40A with a big geographic and DX status advantage over
the rest of the top ten entrants. Most of them from Europe, two from
the States one from A6 and ST2AR who may have a higher DXCC status
ranking but he's using very simple antennas (singe tribander and
wires).

In the 2012 CQ WW DX CW the competitiveness index favors SOAB(A) for
the top ten entrants (ballpark figures, since I don't remember exactly
thoug I did thte math):

SOAB(A) HP 0.82
SOAB HP: 0.80

This is not absolute the right perspective since it's done on a world
wide basis. This is just to demonstrate that in part, your statement
is not valid.

Who are the best operators can only be determined under a very, almost
totally, better said, TOTALLY controlled environment. Which is not the
case of contests other than WRTC.

Nevertheless, the criteria to determine who wins a place as a team
leader is based upon human opinions and perceptions rather than based
on statistical facts.

Based on the numbers SOAB LP can never rank higher than SOAB(A) HP if
competitiveness is a factor. Neither can MS rank higher than SOAB(A).
Some would say, MS aligns more to the WRTC style of operation.
Not true. MS teams outside of WRTC can be formed by a high number of
operators, distributing the working hours by a bunch and making the
need for stamina, endurance, concentration by each operator a whole
lot less than a SOAB(A). In fact, MS can use packet or web clusters,
but they still get a weighting factor of 1!!

Anyways, nice discussion.
Hope to meet you in W1 even if we go as visitors :-)

Vy 73.

Marti, LU5DX