[UK-CONTEST] Feb 144 UKAC

[David G3YYD]

Squares or Distance based scoring is just too simplistic. Distance will 
favour those who live within distant range of the major activities 
centres. Squares will favour those who are in and around the activity 
centres.

So why not put the two together. Score it twice: first by squares and 
normalise all scores with 1000 for the top score. Then score it for 
distance and normalise to 1000 for top score and then add the two 
together to arrive at the result. This is very similar to the RTTY and 
PSK method of scoring for CC data events.

Of course some would then argue that Distance should have a top score of 
1200 and Squares 800 plus those who would argue vice versa, but such is 
life. You know you have it right when one half argue one way and the 
other half argue the other way!

David G3YYD

On 06/02/2010 14:16, Ray James wrote:
>
> --- On Sat, 6/2/10, G3RIR<g3rir at yahoo.com>  wrote:
>
>> I am alone in wishing to keep the multipliers?
> M2 skews the results away from excellent performance to favour those 
> who can pick up the most squares.
> A strange logic that competitors believe someone who worked 28,000Km 
> has outperformed someone who worked 35,000km.
>
> 73 Ray GM4CXM
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest


On 06/02/2010 14:16, Ray James wrote:
>
> --- On Sat, 6/2/10, G3RIR<g3rir at yahoo.com>  wrote:
>
>    
>> I am alone in wishing to keep the multipliers?
>>      
> M2 skews the results away from excellent performance to favour those who can pick up the most squares.
> A strange logic that competitors believe someone who worked 28,000Km has outperformed someone who worked 35,000km.
>
> 73 Ray GM4CXM
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>