Topband: 2004 ARRL 160M Contest

[Ford Peterson]

Tod-K0TO wrote:

...snip...

> It is quite possible to adjust scores by dumping the DX multipliers after
> the logs have been submitted and get an alternate score for everyone. Since
> you are a veteran reporter Ford (this is your second year after all), why
> not quietly do that analysis and report what the top 50 stations with each
> scoring method might be. My personal opinion is that there will be precious
> little change - a good contest operator at a good 160 meter station is going
> to work a LOT of people and dropping DX multipliers won't change the ranking
> by much.
>
> Tod, KØTO

I would love to do the analysis.  But it is not an option.  The scores database is all I get to work with.  No bifurcation of DX vs US/VE mults are provided (mults is mults as they say).  The top few dozen stations work more than 80 mults.  Last year, 124 mults was top score mults.  13 stations had over 100.  West of the Mississippi by any distance was about 90 mults.  Top CA was 86 mults.  Total spread?  38 mults.  

>From a top score standpoint, DX is king.  Without the DX mults, as Ward-N0AX would say, the dynamic range of the contest would be a narrow range of scores with top stations fighting for the last few Qs to be top dog.

Your point about not changing the rankings may well be true.  The right coasters do about 1.4 times as many Qs as the left coasters.  This serves to illustrate how important the regional and section level competition is to getting participation.  More participation is what is important for everybody.

Ford-N0FP
ford at cmgate.com