[VHFcontesting] Goal-Based Contest Scoring

[Ed K1EP]

At 8/26/2005 12:36 PM, Kenneth E. Harker wrote:
>On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 10:19:54AM -0400, n1mu-vhf at rochester.rr.com wrote:
>> Folks,
>> 
>> I still feel like there would be some merit to a "Goal-Based" scoring
>> method.
>> 
>> See:
>> http://tom.2ub.org/docs/N1MU_Proposed_VHF_Contest_Rules.html
>
>My comments:
>
>* The number one, overriding goal of radio contests should be "competition."
>  In the ideal world, the winner of the contest should be the best-designed
>  station operated by the highest performing operator(s).  The goal of the 
>  contest should be to support that result.  Once you start explicitly making 
>  it important to achieve other goals, like "camaraderie" or "activity," even 
>  if they are otherwise laudable in other circumstances, the value of 
>  contesting as a _sport_ is diminished. 

Maybe they should also change the name of June or September VHF QSO *PARTY* to the VHF CONTEST.  

People do not always share the same goals.  Many "contesters" participate in CQ WW DX or ARRL DX CONTESTS to work DX.  They don't care about score.  But they know that the rare DX will only be on during the contest.  The same goes for VHF QSO PARTIES or contests.  Many participants realize that many grids will be activated by rovers, many super stations will be on the air, and generally there will be more activity.  Their GOAL may be to increase their personal grid count on a particular band or test out the DX capabilities of their microwave setup that they just built.  They could care less about winning some arbitrary classification.  This could be a contributing factor to the poor submission of logs.   

> It's a subtle emotional 
>  distinction, perhaps, but one that I think is a major difference between 
>  VHF contest culture (delining log submissions in the past decade) and HF 
>  contest culture (increasing log submission in the past decade.)



>* I've always thought that one of the ways to encourage activity could be
>  to have a contest that didn't involve the bands above 432 MHz.  If a 
>  contest was only 50-144-222-432, it might attract new contesters who 
>  are currently intimidated by going head-to-head with 10 band stations.
>  In fact, a 12 hour, 4 band, SO-only contest on a Saturday in like late 
>  May could be really fun - maybe a VHF NAQP...

CQ sponsors a similar contest, only 6 and 2.  For whatever reason, participation is quite low.