I agree that Distance-Based scoring can't work, but while Distance-based
ranking has some attractive features there are problems with that approach, too.
WRTC uses Distance-Based ranking to select teams to represent each geographical
region of the world. That's a great way to level the playing field as far as
propagation is concerned, but doesn't actually answer the question "Who is the
best operator in the world?" We have to run the WRTC competition itself to
determine that (not a perfectly level playing field, but it's the best we have.)
The point is that while winning one's region may make a contester feel better,
there will always be the question of how contesters compare across regions. Who
is the best in the USA? Who is the best in the world? Even if the contest
sponsor doesn't hand out USA and world trophies, the question will still be
asked. And winners of W1 will tell themselves they're better than winners of
W5, and winners of W5 will still envy the rates and scores of winners of W1.
Perhaps this is justified. Some will make the point that it takes a different
skill set to win W1 than it does to win W5 -- higher rates, bigger pileups,
more mults to find, etc. (similar to SO2R -- it gives you an advantage, but it
takes a high degree of skill to exploit that advantage.) I suspect some in W1
would mutter under their breath, "Yeah, you won W5 but you did it with 2500 Qs,
350 mults and 5 million points while I did it with 4800 Qs, 450 mults and 10
million points! Clearly, I'm the better op."
It gets worse if we look at it from a worldwide perspective. Can the winner of
DL really compare with the winner of ZD8? What happens when the highest-scoring
station in the world is the only competitor from an island entity? Would there
be just a certificate for winning from ZD8 (against no competition) and no
special recognition for beating everyone else in the world? I would have a hard
time comparing myself as winner of W1 (if that were ever possible) against a
winner from ZD8 who did 10,000 QSOs in 48 hours.
Awards are another consideration. I doubt that contest sponsors will be able to
award plaques to regional winners, so do plaques go away? Some of us have
drawers full of paper certificates and would like to compete for some hardware.
Finally, if we level the playing field for location, will there be a push to
level it even further? Perhaps we could eliminate antenna and location
disadvantages by rank stations according to HFTA figures of merit (tongue in
cheek here.)
It's easy for me to say all this as a W1, and believe me I sympathize with
contesters in other regions that don't have the propagation to EU that we do.
But I don't believe Distance-Based scoring or ranking are the way to make them
feel better.
73, Dick WC1M
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ward Silver [mailto:hwardsil@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2015 6:16 PM
> To: Reflector <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Distance-Based Ranking
>
> Distance-based scoring really won't work for bands on which there is a skip
> zone. This is pretty well understood and precludes using it for bands from 40
> through 6 meters. And you have to account for EME on the
> VHF/UHF/Microwave bands, too!
>
> What I think is more likely to "work" (meaning satisfy the need for
> identifying
> and competing with a peer group) is distance-based *ranking* which
> compares one's scores to those from stations in the same category and
> region. I would compete under this type of comparison with stations in the
> Midwest, K9YC with stations on the West Coast, and N1UR with stations in
> the Northeast US, for example.
>
> I devised (with the help of K3NA) such a system about 20 years ago but the
> data and Internet mechanics were not yet available to implement it.
> See the May 1995 issue of NCJ for the system description. Basically, a region
> is identified for each contest based on how the sponsors divide the
> geography. You collect scores from the 10 closest stations in your region and
> category, then prorate your score against those. Many variations of ranking
> are possible - by contest, by type of contest (DX or domestic), by category,
> etc. Many of the geographic inequities drop out in this type of regional
> comparison. No changes in scoring would be required from any sponsor
> which is a requirement.
>
> Simple matter of programming, folks. Have at it :-)
>
> 73, Ward N0AX
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|