[VHFcontesting] distance scoring

[Wixson, Chuck]

ALL Distance scoring "should be" on a distance per watt basis.......
If you want to be fair......     Now we start the discussion of output
OR erp....   

-----Original Message-----
From: vhfcontesting-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:vhfcontesting-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Dan Evans
Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2008 3:19 PM
To: VHFcontesting at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] distance scoring

I like the idea of a distance scoring format.

However, the "big three" contest have a respectable amount of history 
and tradition.  So changing these would meet a lot of resistance.  Just 
look at what changing the Rover rules did.

So I believe it would likely take a "new" contest to get the idea 
started.  A contest within a contest might work to test the waters.  
Maybe we could add a couple of new sprints...


As far as the actual scoring method goes, it's not that critical.  How 
about this:

6m = 1pt per kilometer X 1 for band multiplier
2m=  1pt per kilometer X 2 for band multiplier
222= 1pt per kilometer X 3 for band multiplier
432= 1pt per kilometer X 4 for band multiplier
90x= 1pt per kilometer X 5 for band multiplier
1.2g=1pt per kilometer X 6 for band multiplier
2.3g=1pt per kilometer X 7 for band multiplier
3.5g=1pt per kilometer X 8 for band multiplier
5g =  1pt per kilometer X 9 for band multiplier
10g= 1pt per kilometer X 10 for band multiplier
24g= 1pt per kilometer X 24 for band multiplier
47g= 1pt per kilometer X 47 for band multiplier


and so on, and so forth...  Or maybe instead of +1 mult per band we 
should go with +2....  Or even band squared....  Just brainstorming.

I'm not sure how this would effect Rovers.  It would seem to hurt the 
"run and gun" style Rover with loops making Q's on the fly.  But not so 
much "multi-hill toppers" like me.  I'm assuming a Rover would have to 
move to a new 'base 4' grid before you could work a station again. 

This would work, but I would sure like to see a better incentive to 
activate "rare" grids.  Maybe a "most wanted" grids list bonus?  You 
could use the logs from the previous year to determine the grids with 
the "least" amount of activity and give a bonus for activating these.  
This could make our brothers out west happy:-)


As far as determining a station's six digit grid, it's not that 
difficult.  A $79 Garmin hand held GPS will do.  That's cheaper than a 
good mic, or key.  And, I would recommend having a default.  If a 
station doesn't know their 6 digit grid log the 4 digit, and calculate 
from the grid center.  This way we don't loose the casual op who gets on

to hand out a few contacts, God bless 'em.


By the way, what's next on the topic rotation?  Is it Rover rules, or 
abuse of calling frequencies?  I lost track:-))

73
Dan
-- 
K9ZF /R no budget Rover ***QRP-l #1269 
Check out the Rover Resource Page at: <http://www.qsl.net/n9rla> 
List Administrator for: InHam+grid-loc+ham-books 
Ask me how to join the Indiana Ham Mailing list! 



Zack Widup wrote:
> I like the idea of a CWAC (contest within a contest) too. The only
problem 
> I foresee is getting a 6-character grid from some people.  
>
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting