[CQ-Contest] WRTC Scoring Question

[Tonno Vahk]

Hi,

Introduction of those score comparison areas within a single qualification area is a horrible idea. They did the same in EU1 (splitting Baltics and Scandinavia) and pretty much destroyed motivation to participate for many Baltic ops.

It is absurd and unfair and also seems to be complicated enough to take more than 5 emails to explain to someone as shown below.

It distorts the results completely and works in an opposite way to an expected WRTC concept of selecting best ops.

It clearly favors less active sub region. The bigger the difference between the number of competitve entrats in sub regions the more distorted it becomes.

For example.

In W3 there are 3 active contesters who take a serious shot at WRTC place.

In W1 and W2 there are 10 such entrants.

So in W3 those 3 ops share between themselves the top scores from all qualification contests. Even though they usually make lower scores than the leaders in W1/2.

In W1/2 10 entrants share the top scores and battle hard with each other. They share the top scores between 10 of them in both regions.

The result - ALL 3 qualification spots go to W3 entrants as they all have higher scores given lower competition in their sub area.

This is absolutely crazy and surely qualifies into the Top 10 of the worst ideas of the history of humankind. The organizers completely ignore the facts and reality though and in EU1 case just did this to please a certain lobby group without ever asking for opinions of others.

Maybe the scenario above is hypothetical in W1-3 case, I do not know. But in EU1 case it is very real and the qualification race and WRTC that many Baltic ops were waiting with great expectations was over for many of them before it ever started.

Something has to be done with this WRTC system to avoid every new organizer turning things upside down introducing new rules as they please for whatever most absurd or shady reasons. This is not how it should be if we want to keep this thing alive.

73
ES5TV

On 25. Oct 2023, at 03:32, Ron Notarius W3WN via CQ-Contest <cq-contest at contesting.com> wrote:

Ed, so in short, you believe that as written and as interpreted by you, the current rules give an unfair advantage to the top W1, W2, and W3 region scores, compared to everyone else competing from those regions.

Well, sorry to say, life isn’t always fair.

But it sounds like your beef is with the WRTC 2026 Organizers.

73

73, Ron W3WN

> On Oct 24, 2023, at 8:17 PM, Edward Sawyer <EdwardS at advanced-conversion.com <mailto:EdwardS at advanced-conversion.com>> wrote:
> 
> Hi Ron.  Lets use this example.  The W1 winner has 1,000,000 as a score and I am number 2 with 950,000.  W1 winner gets 1,000 points and I get 950 points.  Lets say number 3 and 4 get 900,000 points and they are in W2 and W3.  The old way, would have me #2 after the first contest.  This new way, has 3 people at 1,000 points and I have 950 points and I am now number 4.
> 
> Simple math.
> 
> Ed  N1UR
> 
> From: Ron Notarius W3WN <wn3vaw at verizon.net> 
> Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2023 7:48 PM
> To: Edward Sawyer <EdwardS at advanced-conversion.com>
> Cc: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WRTC Scoring Question
> 
> Ed, I didn’t write, or was involved in writing, the rules, so I couldn’t possibly answer why they were written the way you describe.
> 
> I still don’t see your point.  Are you saying that the rules are set up to favor certain operators over others?  Or just that they’re poorly written... or at least not clear in their intent?
> 
> 73
> 
> 73, Ron W3WN
> 
> On Oct 24, 2023, at 4:37 PM, Edward Sawyer <EdwardS at advanced-conversion.com <mailto:EdwardS at advanced-conversion.com>> wrote:
> 
> Ron, Then why not say there is one TL for W1 and W2 and W3.  Instead of calling 3 TL from the area and then distorting the qualifying.
> 
> Have 3 people “win” every contest that are all actually competing for the same slots is illogical.  It is NOT what you just described.
> 
> Ed  N1UR
> 
> From: Ron Notarius W3WN <wn3vaw at verizon.net <mailto:wn3vaw at verizon.net>>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2023 3:37 PM
> To: Edward Sawyer <EdwardS at advanced-conversion.com <mailto:EdwardS at advanced-conversion.com>>
> Cc: cq-contest at contesting.com <mailto:cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WRTC Scoring Question
> 
> I’m not sure I understand the question.
> 
> There are three qualifying districts.  The top score in each qualifies.  Simple.  Right?
> 
> So what’s the issue?
> 
> 73, Ron W3WN
> 
> On Oct 24, 2023, at 12:14 PM, Edward Sawyer <EdwardS at advanced-conversion.com <mailto:EdwardS at advanced-conversion.com><mailto:EdwardS at advanced-conversion.com>> wrote:
> I wanted to put out the question to the group here to see if I am interpreting this correctly.
> 
> In the 1st qualification area of the US, there are 3 qualifying districts, W1, W2, W3.  If the highest score in W1 is 5 Million and the highest score in W2 is 4 Million and the highest score in W3 is 3 Million, there will be 3 people that made those highest scores earning 1,000 points - assuming they are all HP Unassisted.  So instead of 1 winner of the area there are actually 3 winners of the area for every contest. And there are only 3 TL selected from the W1, W2, W3 area.  Even though there could have been numerous scores much higher than the W3 score in this example, the W3 winner will get the same credit as if they had the 5 Million score.
> 
> If the above is correct, this seems highly distorted.  You are guaranteeing 3 x 1000 point winners in the contest vs it should only have 1 x 1000  points.
> 
> Please comment on whether this is in fact right.  Doesn't feel right....
> 
> Ed  N1UR
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com <mailto:CQ-Contest at contesting.com><mailto:CQ-Contest at contesting.com>
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com <mailto:CQ-Contest at contesting.com>
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com <mailto:CQ-Contest at contesting.com>
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest