[CQ-Contest] Challenges vs Teams

[Ward Silver]

This seems quite do-able.  Perhaps use the getscores system to display 
the team scores using some kind of pre-registration process to identify 
which SOA scores to add?

It would be a great beta-test and probably generate a lot of other ideas 
about more stations, extensions to the scoring, specific competition 
elements beyond QSO points and multipliers, etc.

But I agree - start small and run a few demos first to see what happens.

73, Ward N0AX

On 12/10/2013 11:18 AM, Gerry Hull wrote:
> I have been talking with a few contest friends about the team idea. 
>  We were trying to come up with a really cool team implementation that 
> would play in the current contest structure, with very minor 
> modification and no real logger changes.
>
> How about this: SOTA:  Single-Op Team Assisted.   These are two 
> single-ops as a team.  Team Members can be from anywhere.   The team 
> members are interconnected on the internet, and can pass stations to 
> each other.   They use their own calls. They would be Assisted because 
> they can share passes, and they can use Spots.   They could have a 
> power overlay.   An additional cabrillo line identifies the team.   
> All QSOs allowed per host contest rules.
> No on-air team id -- but perhaps teams could be tracked by real-time 
> web site.
>
> Can  two Americans, one from the west and one from the east beat a 
> team from Europe and Asia?
> Can VY2 + D4 beat OH + 3V?
>
> These and many other combinations that could be tested.
>
> The reason for only two-man teams?   It's easy to start with, and 
> simplifies the rules.
>
> 73, Gerry W1VE.
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 12:35 PM, Ward Silver <hwardsil at gmail.com 
> <mailto:hwardsil at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Challenges are as old as contesting - the one with which I am best
>     acquainted is the Pacific NW Traveling Trophy
>     (http://www.wwdxc.org/operating/contesting/pacific-northwest-challenge-cup-rules.html)
>     that creates a year-long competition between the OR/WA/VE7
>     contesters.  This is how they maintain interest and activity in a
>     propagationally "unique" area that rarely has a shot at
>     continental top spots. (There are exceptions but we are talking
>     about the majority of contesters who don't have big stations.)
>
>     What is important is the sense of relative equality and
>     peer-to-peer competition.  This sort of organized challenge works
>     best on a local and regional basis because of the propagation and
>     scoring variations over bigger areas which have been discussed
>     widely for the past few days.  It doesn't make a lot of sense for
>     equal stations to challenge each other if they are located in
>     widely separated locations, for example.  Rather than pursue the
>     unattainable goal of a level playing field, find a level spot on
>     the field and play there, instead.
>
>     On the other hand, competitions of distributed stations connected
>     over a network, compiling a common log, and working as a single
>     team as has been proposed can be up to world-wide depending on the
>     rules.  I suggest starting relatively simply with two basic
>     categories:
>     - Distributed multi-single: one active transmitter at a time, all
>     operators can receive, perhaps with a minimum time required
>     between band changes and a maximum period during which any one
>     station can make contacts.
>     - Distributed multi-multi: up to six SOAB stations all combined
>     into one team with the only restriction being the
>     one-signal-at-a-time-per-band (or maybe only one-signal-at-a-time).
>
>     It would be a strategic decision how to allocate operator and
>     station resources vs time and band.  Do you have six strong
>     single-band operations or do you allocate the all-band stations
>     through the day based on propagation or does every station try to
>     work everything and anything all the time?  Or something else
>     entirely?
>
>     Perhaps an on-air team ID is not required - it really doesn't
>     matter as long as the team manages the log internally to not claim
>     credit for dupes. (We would need to consider what happens when
>     more than one team station CQs on a band under different
>     calls...not simultaneously...but this might not be an issue and
>     could be part of strategy.)  It should be required, though, that
>     the teams post their composite score and breakdowns in real-time.
>      Teams should preregister each member under the common name, I
>     would think.
>
>     Sounds like fun to me!
>
>     73, Ward N0AX
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     CQ-Contest mailing list
>     CQ-Contest at contesting.com <mailto:CQ-Contest at contesting.com>
>     http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>