[VHFcontesting] [VHF] Announcing the VHF Distance Scoring 2009 Report

[w8zn at comcast.net]

Hi Kevin and the working group.

I applaud your group and wish you the very best luck. This is a step in the right direction to equalize the scoring and help put an end to some of the pack roving that helps no one else but the participants, once it is no longer profitable to just work at grid corners, it will probably go away.

I do have one comment about item 4B, a weighted score for upper bands. Why isn't it enough that another band yields another contact and distance mult? Some time ago when a microwave station was entirely built from surplus or home brew design, I would agree that it was worth more points. But with DEM and DB6NT offering off the shelf ready built systems, these bands don't really offer much more challenge than fighting QRM on 144.200. There is a small amount of extra work pointing a dish that doesn't exist with a 3 element 6m beam but if the signal is there, you work it and in some cases, I've found a 1w signal on 10 GHz is EASIER to work than a 100w signal on 6m. As evident in most of the ARRL contests, a station that maximizes their microwaves Q's will almost always dominate even if they don't have a decent lower 4 band score, this seems counter to increase activity. In HF, you don't get extra points for a 160m or 10m contact, which are much harder than a 20m Q, VHF and above should be the same.

Thanks again for your fine efforts,

Terry



The VHF Distance Scoring Working Group has been considering many distance scoring options over the last several months. This effort has been a grass-roots, independent activity outside of the usual contest sponsor committee structure. It was thought that ideas could be developed by the VHF community itself for further consideration of all potential sponsors. B The working group can be found at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/VHFDistanceScoring/

B 

The full report of the working group is now available at: 

http://www.w9smc.com/SMC%20VHF/DistanceScoring2009Report.pdfB  Please feel free to look at the entire document and provide comments. 

B 

The working group believes that current VHF rules are adequate in many situations, but the uniformity and sameness of the current rules set may be generating complacency and boredom. There has also been a concern expressed over short-range contacts to strategically located nearby grids. Distance-based methods would emphasize operator skill and technical abilities by constantly reaching for longer contacts. 

B 

The central issue boils down to this: Why must there be such a high degree of uniformity of contest rules in almost every VHF contest? Why canbt there be at least one VHF contest that is expressly based on longer distances? Variety is the spice of life. 

B 

The VHF working group recommends the following items be considered. Constructive, well-reasoned comments would be greatly appreciated.



1.B  In the short-term, experimentation with distance rules should be done either in the VHF Sprints or a new event.B  

B 

2.B  If and when distance rules are perfected and prove to be a success in the Sprints or other event, then the concept could be attempted in one or more major event.B  

B 

B  B B B a. Simulations show that distance events may degenerate into 6 meter contests when significant Es is present, so June and CQ VHF may not be the best suited for distance concepts.

B 

B  B B B b.B January or September would likely be better for a distance event, with band activity being more dispersed. 

B 

B  B B B c.B Two simulations also showed that the August UHF is well suited for distance efforts. 

B 

3.B  Regarding the distance method to be used, there was overwhelming support among group members for a points per km system. 

B 

4.B  A gradual band weighting schedule should be given consideration in multi-band distance events. 

B 

5.B  Reasonable types of distance limits, such as a sliding scale, should be given further consideration, but no ban or severe limit should be imposed on very long contacts. 

B 

6.B  The majority of the working group believes that some type of re-contact rule should be given further consideration. 

B 

7.B  Wherever possible, distance rules should be kept simple. 

B 

8.B  On a near-term basis, 4 digit exchanges may be viable. Over the long-term however, 6 digits should eventually be adopted. B 

B 

9.B  Contest sponsors develop and announce a standard method by which distances will be calculated. 

B 

B 

These above recommendations are not designed to be the definite answer to all distance-based efforts. Indeed, we developed a baseline set of distance rules along with alternate proposals, just so that further discussion would occur. We also developed model distance calculation standards which also contain alternate language. It is simply hoped that a more discussion will be given to distance concepts in one or more VHF contests.B  B 

B 

Future efforts of the VHF Distance Working Group will likely focus on the 2010 VHF Spring Sprints, as there have been suggestions that the Spring Sprints feature distance measures next year.B  Please feel free to drop by and join the distance working group at the above link. 

B 

B 

Kevin

W9GKA

Moderator

Distance Scoring Working Group

------

Submissions:                    vhf at w6yx.stanford.edu

Subscription/removal requests:  vhf-request at w6yx.stanford.edu

Human list administrator:       vhf-approval at w6yx.stanford.edu

List rules and information:    http://www-w6yx.stanford.edu/vhf/