[CQ-Contest] RES: The two/four-point rule in WPX

[py5eg]

I TOTALLY AGREE ALSO
OMS PY5EG

-----Mensagem original-----
De: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] Em nome de 4O3A
Enviada em: quinta-feira, 10 de abril de 2014 10:03
Para: cq-contest at contesting.com
Assunto: Re: [CQ-Contest] The two/four-point rule in WPX

It is one of our crucial issues - scoring.
Kim is absolutely right, and from my point of view, all what he is saying is so obvious, clear and aright, that I do not understand some polemics. We all would like to equalize areas, not to favor anyone.

Also Jim's thinking is even simpler and nicer - to give 3 points for every QSO out of country. More competition, more competitive stations - more fun. My full support.

73
Ranko


On 4/10/2014 2:02 PM, Kim Östman wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> Removing the exception simply brings the NA Caribbean stations to 
> everybody else's level and rules.
>
> If such playing under equal rules is seen as "unfair," then the 
> problem lies with the basic scoring system, and you can't fix that 
> with this kind of exception for just a privileged few.
>
> Again, there are two very distinct and separate things at play here:
>
> 1) The basic continental-divide scoring system
> 2) The 2/4-point NA exception to it
>
> Most agree that the first one is fundamentally flawed. But it is so 
> entrenched that I'm afraid we will not see it changed before our hobby 
> dies out.
>
> Thus I'm focusing only on the second one. We can't put band-aid on the 
> big problem by maintaining a parochial exception that makes it even 
> more "unfair" for everybody else. Numerous examples can be shown of 
> how this has distorted contest results (beyond the basic system) and 
> reversed final placements.
>
> In an event that purports to be a competition and to be worldwide, I 
> think
>
> this piece of basic logic should be patently obvious. I'm happy to say 
> that private communications around this thread are acknowledging this 
> fact, even from among the beneficiaries.
>
> I'm still hoping to hear official answers to the two questions posed 
> previously.
>
> 73
> Kim OH6KZP
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> There is no way to make contesting fair. Changing north american 
> contacts back one point would make it more unfair for stations in the 
> Caribbean to compete with stations in South America.
>
> John KK9A
>
>
> To:	 'Kim Östman' <kim.ostman at tut.fi>,	<cq-contest at
> contesting.com>
> Subject:	 Re: [CQ-Contest] The two/four-point rule in WPX
> From:	 "Randy Thompson K5ZD" <k5zd at charter.net>
> Reply-to:	k5zd at charter.net
> Date:	 Wed, 9 Apr 2014 11:45:20 -0000
>
> >From the CQ WW Handbook, January 1999, by Bob Cox, K3EST
>
> Brief History of the CQ WW Contest
>
> "... [1962] was when the North American two point rule came into 
> existence. With such a rule, it was hoped that more activity would 
> occur in the Caribbean and Central America countries. All these 
> changes were brought into the rules by Frank, W1WY."
>
> This rule has definitely accomplished its purpose by motivating a lot 
> of contest expeditions to the Caribbean.  I don't see this rule 
> changing any time soon.
>
> Randy, K5ZD
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2014.0.4355 / Virus Database: 3882/7325 - Release Date: 
> 04/10/14
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest