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

Rick Kiessig kiessig at gmail.com
Fri Nov 29 15:36:43 EST 2013


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




More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list