[UK-CONTEST] Score publishing
Donald Field
g3xtt at lineone.net
Tue Jun 13 17:13:17 EDT 2006
Actually most of what Chris says is misleading (sri Chris!).
It should be trivial in this day and age to produce, not "claimed" scores
(which are often in error), but pre-adjudicated scores. In other words,
scores calculated by the adjudicators, on a consistent basis, but before
checking has taken place. Given that the code should be available to score
the Cabrillo logs after checking, to run it on those same logs before
checking is a non-issue.
The problem is that such code doesn't currently exist for all RSGB contests
and adjudication is still far more labour intensive than it should be. What
we need is a volunteer to take what we do have (for example for the IOTA
contest) and do whatever is necessary to work on other events. Any PHP and
MySQL experts out there with time on their hands?
Don G3XTT
-----Original Message-----
From: uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of G3SJJ
Sent: 13 June 2006 21:45
Cc: UK-Contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] Score publishing
On a technical basis, I would tend to go with Justin on this one, Bob.
Unless you re-specify Cabrillo for UK-sponsored contests and require all
entrants to submit a scored log by having them add a points column, it
is time consuming to produce a claimed score listing. Having said that,
I have thought for a long time that from a "marketing" point of view
(and one which HFCC does seem to have a low interest in) it is really
vital that a claimed or final listing is published rapidly to maintain
the momentum of the event which is just happened.
Interestingly, Justin's latest posting confirms my thoughts. Justin,
claimed score listings are important to maintain the immediate interest.
An accurately adjudicated final listing 6 months after the event might
be technically superior but most people want to see how they faired and
how they compared within a few weeks if not days. Most of the time, the
final listing is very close to the claimed listing, with maybe a few
position changes, and anyway it is fairly easy to gauge those. For
example, based on a typical 2.5% error rate, if you are say 5% higher
than the person below, you should retain that placing, or may be even
move up. For me, if I am not in award contention then I am more
interested in this aspect rather than being made to wait until the final
technically honed listing.
(A few years ago G3VHB and myself produced the final results for SSB FD
within a few days of the closing date for entries, so it can be done!)
Pre-Cabrillo it was easier, but the tasks are still the same and last
years final listing will contain most of the callsigns in this years, so
producing a list of entrants is simple. I guess it really does come down
to whether you are interested in a clinically, technically accurate
final result or whether you go for the "marketing" aspect. I think Bob
and I would prefer the latter, and I actually think most RSGB sponsored
events could accommodate this approach now.
Vote M(arketing) or T(echnical) !!
Chris G3SJJ
Bob Henderson wrote:
> Justin,
>
> There is always a way for those willing to find it but those satisfied
> bemoaning the problems they face, never will.
>
> If HFCC were to mandate inclusion of claimed score and category of entry
> into the Cabrillo header or onto a summary sheet in the case of a
> non-Cabrillo entry, you would have the information required to do this.
> Failure to meet a mandated requirement would invalidate an entry.
>
> You would be publishing "claimed" not "validated" scores. If some folks
> want to make fools of themselves by submitting eroneous claimed scores
then
> so be it. You could always asterisk scores which appear inconsistent with
> claim summary, were you to consider it appropriate.
>
> Where there's the will there's a way.
>
> Bob, 5B4AGN
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Justin Snow" <justin at g4tsh.demon.co.uk>
> To: "Bob Henderson" <bob at 5b4agn.net>; <UK-Contest at contesting.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 6:44 PM
> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] Score publishing
>
>
>
>> Sorry Bob, but I think you don't appreciate where the effort is in this
>> process. Publishing something that is given to you on a plate is easy,
>>
> our
>
>> current web master Tim, M0BEW can do this. The hard bit is extracting
the
>> info from the logs sent to us. And that assumes they are all in the same
>> format and contain a claimed score! many of those that do are so wide of
>> the mark that it is irrelevant anyway. The entrant may wish to "claim" a
>> certain score and publish it.
>> We do not have any software/robot that will do this so it is a manual
>>
> task.
>
>> As an entrant I would rather see the adjudicator spend their precious
time
>> working out the RESULT of the contest as quickly as possible. That is
>>
> what
>
>> we are here for.
>>
>> Justin
>>
>> cc. UK contest
>>
>> At 18:18 13/06/06 +0000, Bob Henderson wrote:
>>
>>> Justin
>>>
>>> Neither the technology nor the effort is significant. If you are
serious
>>> and the HFCC lacks the technical capability and effort necessary to do
>>>
> this,
>
>>> then I do indeed offer to do it for you.
>>>
>>> The logical place to publish this information is on the HFCC website.
>>>
> You
>
>>> will need to give me FTP access.
>>>
>>> You will need to arrange for claimed score information to be sent to me
>>> within hours of the deadline.
>>>
>>> I should point out that the process of formatting claimed scores to send
>>> them to me is equivalent in labour terms to formatting an html page of
>>> claimed scores to be uploaded to the HFCC website. Then the process of
>>> linking and loading the page to the site would take no more than a few
>>> minutes.
>>>
>>> Do you have a manager/author for the HFCC website?
>>>
>>> Bob, 5B4AGN
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Justin Snow" <hfcc.chairman at rsgb.org.uk>
>>> To: <UK-Contest at contesting.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 5:50 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] Score publishing
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> At 17:44 13/06/06 +0000, you wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Not unusual but I take a rather different view!
>>>>>
>>>>> Whether individuals or teams publish their claimed score is
>>>>>
> discretionary
>
>>>>> not mandatory. While such discretion, exists it seems unfair to
>>>>>
> pilory
>
>>>>> those who choose not to do so.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think a better approach would be for sponsors to:-
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Ensure log submission deadlines are no longer than absolutely
>>>>>
>>> necessary.
>>>
>>>>> 2. Publish claimed scores to the web within 24 hours after reaching
>>>>>
> the
>
>>>>> deadline for receipt of entries.
>>>>>
>>>>> Some of our more dynamic European cousins are already doing this.
>>>>>
>>>>> Bob, 5B4AGN
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> No. 2. - Great idea Bob, but are you willing to provide the technology
>>>>
>>> and
>>>
>>>> effort to do that? If so let me know.
>>>>
>>>> some of our so called more dynamic EU cousins seem to have a lot of
>>>>
> free
>
>>>> time and cheap resources on their hands.
>>>>
>>>> Justin, G4TSH
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Justin Snow G4TSH
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> UK-Contest mailing list
>>>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
>>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> UK-Contest mailing list
>>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>>>
>>>
>> Justin Snow G4TSH
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> UK-Contest mailing list
>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>
>
_______________________________________________
UK-Contest mailing list
UK-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
More information about the UK-Contest
mailing list