[CQ-Contest] CQ WW Scoring System needs revision?

[Fabio I4UFH]

Hi Guys,

Even it will be impossible to equalize the world, with the right equation, i have one more 
simple idea, that i didn’t show up, this year, apologies if if has still be discussed in the past :


Without scrambling software developers or online scores, or Software committee,
to endorse the DX QSO, i can suggest a different points related to your CQZone, no more Country or Continents. 

Same CQ Zone 	=	1 	Points
Adjacent Zone		=	2	Points
Other Zone		=	3	Points

For adjacent Zone i mean the CQZone that has borders with your Zone.

Benefit ? Well everyone still will try the DX QSO. PJ will still have 3 points with NA,
but also TI, XE Zone 3 and 4 at 2 points, and zone 5 a 3 points, LU almost 3 points,
CN, EA8 2 points zone 14, 15 and 5, 3 point others, 9M will add more bloods with almost
JA’s a 3 points .. etc. etc.

it’s is a brief analyze, obviously there will be some place in the world that still had advantages,
but are advantages related with his far away location, that is the core of the discussion.

To calculate is very easy, every Zone has it’s adjacent  Zone , so no need to send different reports,
no need to distance approximate calculation, no need to add K’s factor to correct polar path, simply
a different point of view related with what still have … the CQZones..

If i will have time into the December Holiday i will try to rescore old logs with these new rules !

Just one more cents   

73 de Fabio I4UFH



Il giorno 29/nov/2013, alle ore 21:36, Rick Kiessig <kiessig at gmail.com> ha scritto:

> I think it's a mistake to look at distance-based scoring strictly as a
> measure of effort to complete a QSO. Even though it's a much better measure
> than DXCC or Zone, that's not the real intent, IMO.
> 
> Instead, I think the goal is to get population-dense areas to point their
> antennas away from each other, and out toward the rest of the world, by
> encouraging multiple contacts with distant places. CQWW's scoring system of
> zero points for QSOs in your own country is a good first step, but when
> there are many countries (or another continent) right next door, it's not as
> effective as it should be.
> 
> 73, Rick ZL2HAM / ZM1G
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> Aldewey at aol.com
> Sent: Saturday, November 30, 2013 5:31 AM
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Scoring System needs revision?
> 
> Distance based scoring is something that was looked at in detail for ARRL DX
> contest a couple years ago.  While it had it's advocates, there were a
> couple main concerns that caused us to set it aside for now.  The first was
> that, depending on propagation, the distance of a Contest QSO, does not
> always  equate to the effort needed to make that Q.  In many cases, on 10
> and 15  meters for example, it is easier for someone Florida (for example)
> to make a  contact with EU than it is the Caribbean.  The CAC actually
> worked with someone who re scored a couple past DX Contests using the
> Distance Based Scoring  and the results did not change all that much.
> Scores in the middle part of  the U.S. rose and scores on the east coasts
> went down and the order of the top  ten changed a little but not that much.
> Logging software would have to  change of course and we were concerned that
> there were many contesters that  would not be comfortable with Grid Squares
> (which would give the most accurate  results).  Finally, the majority of the
> contesters we talked to were not in  favor or such a change.
> 
> So, at least for now, the change was not recommended.
> 
> 73,
> 
> AL, K0AD
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest