[CQ-Contest] WRTC Category Weighting Factor

Edward Sawyer SawyerEd at earthlink.net
Thu Aug 23 05:42:15 EDT 2012

As might be expected, I have followed this topic for many years since, like
Syl and Nate, I am a competitive LP contester.  In order to see the reality
here, you need to look way beyond the portion of the topic that has been
discussed so far.


In 2006, the criteria was again 0.9 weighting however there was a HUGE
difference to the 2010 and 2014 criteria.  The placement in the contest was
paramount.  You got a HUGE boost for winning the contest and even more if
you set a record (as I remember).  You could not easily get to WRTC unless
you actually won contests.  Now the formula is based on score so someone who
comes in 2nd or 3rd all the time but is always really close the winning
score can beat out someone who wins sometimes but comes in 2nd or 3rd with
larger score discrepancies.


The other BIG difference in 2014 is the "one winner per call area or smaller
geographic zone" process.  Saying that 1 team leader is selected out of an
area like W1 is quite frankly mind blowing in my opinion.  The only reason
it isn't laughable this coming competition is that many of the competing W1
stations have opted out since they are part of the organizing.  It will be
interesting to see how popular that feature is for the next one..


Having competed in many categories, I actually feel that the weighting
factor of 2006 and 2014 is reasonable.  I think a premium should be put on
"the win".  We don't give 95% trophies to the second place position in life.
The winner gets a trophy, and there should be value in the win, in my


I have never liked the concept of half of the competitors getting a "bye"
and being chosen as teammates.  A competition should be "everyone earns the
right", I believe.  I also think that selecting 1 participant per call area
is the most unfair part of the process.  I would much rather see contests
like NAQP, SS, WPX, IARU, and ARRL 10 and 160 be weighed much higher so that
the geographic North American advantages could be much better balanced and
then select the participants from a much wider pool.  It is actually much
harder for a W1 to come in the top 5 of SS then it is for a W9 to come in
the top 5 in CQWW or ARRL DX.  So much more sophisticated contest weighting
would do a more efficient chance of giving a broad group a chance than the
current system.


Then when the actual participants are finalized, you get the regional down
selecting process allowing contestants who honestly "catch a break" to be
able to go vs contestants who may have scored much higher in their region as
the number 2 spot.  Is that truly representing the top contesters at that
time.my opinion is it does not.


By the way, I have voiced these opinions before to people involved but it
had no impact at the time.


Ironically, I am sitting 2nd currently in W1 for the one spot for team
leader.  However, K1LZ, is the deserved "odds on favorite" for this area and
K1DG, K5ZD, K1RX, and I believe some others have opted out.  


It is what it is.  I still love contesting and being competitive.




Ed  N1UR

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list