[VHFcontesting] VHF Contesting: Fixing the Grid Circling Problem

[KA6AMD]

Hello Zack,

There is already an ARRL contest that has all of this.  Its the 10GHz
contest.  You exchange 6 digit grid coordinates, scoring is by distance, you
have to be at least 1 km from other station, you get points for each unique
call you work, and you have to move the station 10 miles before you can
contact the same stations again.

Seems like this would solve the problem of grid circling completely, but
allow the rovers significant freedom.  The biggest downside is that it could
skew the contest to 6M with high distance scores if prop was good.  You
would probably have to keep the increasing point mults with frequency.

Erich
KA6AMD

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Zack Widup" <w9sz at prairienet.org>
To: "VHF Contesting e-Mail List" <vhfcontesting at contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 5:50 AM
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] VHF Contesting: Fixing the Grid Circling 
Problem


>
> Hi Ev,
>
> I can see your point but eliminating grid squares at this time might be
> more problem than it's worth.  I think the idea was a good one to start
> with. If you live in New England, it's easy to get multipliers with the
> states as mults.  It's more difficult in Illinois and even more so in
> Texas!
>
> So do we completely eliminate grid squares, keep them, or modify contest
> rules so the grid square is merely an indication of your location?
>
> With a distance-based scoring system, I can see problems in scoring if you
> have no idea where the other station is located. Maybe HE doesn't even
> know where he's located. Latitude and longitude are a bit too much to be
> exchanging over a VHF+ path with only marginal conditions.  Maybe we
> should go to 12-character grid exchanges?  That'll make a contester out
> of you! Just KNOWING your 12-character grid would be challenge enough!
> :-)  Actually, the 6-character grid may be sufficient for scoring, and
> it's relatively easy to determine and to exchange over the air.
>
> Otherwise, I'd hate to see Rovers go by the boards, but what kind of rules
> would we establish for them?  A Rover has to move 50 km before working the
> same stations again?
>
> Actually, a rule like that might just eliminate grid circling even with
> the existing grid square system. It would at least add more time into the
> equation. Now that I think about it, that might be a very good solution.
>
> 73, Zack W9SZ
>
>
>
> On Thu, 4 Aug 2005, Radiosporting Fan wrote:
>
>> The problem: Grids as multipliers (if you don't have
>> 'em, you can't circle 'em) and human nature to exploit
>> vulnerabilities to personal advantage.  The playing
>> field is *not* level and the rules reveal that.
>>
>> As long as Grids are multipliers, there is an
>> "artificialness" that is built in to VHF
>> radiosporting...an "artificailness" that is
>> exacerbated by increasing complexity in the rules.
>> Step back and realize that the rules grow in
>> complexity because of the "artificialness" of what
>> grid squares really are...a human notion (RF doesn't
>> care).
>>
>> Solution?  DX-based scoring (ok...maybe based on
>> Grid-6 or Grid-8 location) with no multipliers and no
>> "fudge factors" what so ever.  If the QSO takes place
>> over a distance of 1-km, then you get 1-point.  THAT
>> is a level playing field (it also levels it for those
>> who are not fortunate to live within LASER distance of
>> an invisible gridline, btw).
>>
>> Go to a 4-square intersection and circle all you want.
>>  Those 1-km QSO-points are all you deserve.
>>
>> One makes contact with as many others as possible
>> simply by building a station that is capable of
>> communicating over greater and greater distances or by
>> establishing contesting methodologies that allow you
>> to reach more stations within your existing range.
>> You want a bigger score?  Get an amplifier, improve
>> your station and learn the skills of the radiosport;
>> but don't expect the world to create a special
>> category or rule to make you feel better.  Alas, that
>> is what we've done, and the reason for the dilema we
>> are faced with.
>>
>> Ev, W2EV
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> VHFcontesting mailing list
> VHFcontesting at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting