[VHFcontesting] My thoughts on roving

[James Duffey]

There are several simple rules or scoring modifications that can be  
implemented without artificially restricting the number of QSOs that  
can be made by rovers of any class. I have discussed these earlier,  
but they are not my original ideas. The VUAC prefers to propose  
incremental changes to the rules, so it may be a long time before we  
see these changes implemented.


1. Score and report rover's scores by grid. The total rover's score  
would be the sum of all the individual scores from each grid. Rover's  
would compete for awards within grids with stationary stations. They  
would compete within sections, divisions, and/or regions with other  
rovers. Since the exchange is a grid square, it is rather artificial  
to report scores by section. This would reduce overall rover scores  
substantially, bu tput them more in line with fixed stations. This  
scoring suggestion is essentially what was done for the QRP Portable  
class prior to establishing the rover class. It has its own  
controversy, namely that the same station could win multiple sections,  
could even place several times in the top ten, which was one of the  
reasons that the rover class was established. However, with all the  
rovers in multiple grids, this would not be a problem.


2. Implement distance based scoring. Eliminate grid squares as  
multipliers. The 10 GHz contest does this.


3. Give double QSO points for the initial contact with a station. This  
will award the stations that work a lot of different stations, without  
placing artificial restrictions on the number of QSOs allowed. The 10  
GHz contest gives additional points for an initial contest.


4. Establish a minimum distance, say 10 km that a rover must move  
before the rover can contact the same station. Again, the 10 GHz  
contest does this.


5. Eliminate or reduce the QSO point differential by band.



There is no reason why all of the VHF/UHF contests need to have the  
same format and scoring. Here are my suggestions for implementing  
these changes.


1. For the UHF contest, implement the 10 GHz rules and scoring as is.  
There is no rover controversy in the 10 GHz contest.


2. For the January contest, as there is usually no enhanced  
propagation, implement the 10 GHz rules or a variation on them.


3. For the June contest, which essentially becomes a 6M contest when  
the band is open, eliminate the QSO point differential for higher band  
contacts as they become less important to the total score when all the  
activity is concentrated on 6M.


4. For the September contest, implement scoring by suggestion 1 above.  
Leave the rest of the rules alone.


Or you can mix and match as you see fit.


Or you can leave things the way they are. That would be OK with me as  
well. We can spend the effort instead recruiting new VHF contest ops  
and new rovers from the VHF contest community.


I think that we should concentrate on encouraging activity and  
implement rules to that end. Trying to level the playing field, or  
making things "fair", is an effort in futility.


With open logs, one could analyze previous logs submitted and see how  
these rule changes would effect results. Without them we can only  
guess. That is a useful. - Duffey
--
KK6MC
James Duffey
Cedar Crest NM