CQ zones divide the world into 40 arbitrary groupings. Perhaps that is
close enough to get started.
Or you could use ITU zones. That divides the world into 75 (?) zones. The
cty files put out by AD1C include the ITU zone info for most calls. Better?
Hard to say.
Or you could use the qrz.com API to get the grid for each call. Maybe it
isn't 100% accurate for that call for that weekend, but it could be used to
test the hypothesis.
The real challenge here is motivation. Someone has to do something to get
the ball rolling.
Randy, K5ZD
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> RT Clay
> Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 3:32 PM
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Establishing a contest within a contest
>
> This is always brought up as an argument why distance-based scoring
> shouldn't be considered- "if the idea is applied to xxx contest, nothing
> much changes." The problem is that the location defined by the CQWW
> exchange (zone and country) is not sufficiently specific to define the
> location of a station on a length scale that is significant for
> propagation. For example, stations in west FL and ME are both USA, zone
> 5. Do they have similar distances and conditions working Europe on the
> low bands? No. For distance-based scoring to work, it has to include a
> location which is precise enough to have a higher correlation with
> propagation differences. For a HF DX contest, I suspect that is more like
> a grid field than a CQ/ITU zone.
>
> TorN4OGW
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|