Jim,
Those are all excellent points. One thing, though, is it suggests the Canadian
sub-bands (lack thereof, really), isn't really a core issue.
Your fixes would fix a lot for a bunch of folks.
I can't help but wonder if the subconscious issue, one that some perhaps can't
recognize, let alone admit to, is that the NE US and eastern seaboard had for
some time a major advantage over most of W/VE and now some of those operators
can't abide by two of their own finding a way to overcome that advantage.
The difference between US and Canadian regulations would thus be merely the
scapegoat.
73, kelly, ve4xt
Sent from my iPhone
> On Feb 24, 2016, at 10:43 PM, Jim Brown <k9yc@audiosystemsgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed,2/24/2016 6:26 PM, Ken Widelitz wrote:
>> Of course the West coast isn't going to come close to the East coast in a DX
>> contest.
>
> That depends ENTIRELY on scoring rules. We has hams have gotten used to the
> definition of a DX contest as one where number of contacts is multiplied by
> number of multipliers, and the ONLY multipliers are countries. Simple scoring
> rules of that sort made sense when the only computers available to us were
> pencil and paper doing simple addition and multiplication.
>
> But those simple-minded rules make NO SENSE today, thanks to wide disparities
> in the geographical distribution of hams, the geographical distribution and
> size of countries, and the VERY different propagation conditions between hams
> in various parts of the world and those population centers. Modern computers
> make practical the computation of all sorts of distance-based scoring rules,
> or of definitions of multipliers other than a "country."
>
> For all practical purposes in contests, Asia rarely provides more than a
> dozen or so countries, OC rarely more than a half dozen, and the distance to
> those countries from W6/W7 is significantly greater than from the eastern
> seaboard to EU and AF. The only significant activity in AS and OC is JA.
>
> How would you like it if the European Union was a single multiplier? That's
> our condition with China (much of a continent), VK (an entire continent),
> Russia (much of two continents), and Japan (often 40% of the Qs in a west
> coast log).
>
> If we must insist on the concept of multipliers with no distances, I propose
> that JA prefectures be multipliers, along with states in VK and BY. That
> would be very easy to do -- they're already numbered. Oh -- but we can't do
> that, it would be different, and make it impossible to compare current scores
> with historical ones. BS -- spotting networks, Skimmer, automated messages,
> SO2R, automated dupe checking have already done that, in spades!
>
> The REAL reason for resistance to this sort of change is like with any other
> privileged group -- they don't want to give up their massive advantage! You
> (Ken) have the advantage of a very short hop to EU and bands that are open a
> lot more than for most others. Those with contest stations in the Caribbean
> have the continental multiplier in some contests, and a short water path to
> all the major ham population centers except JA.
>
> But what about the thousands of little guys you big guns want to work, who
> can't afford to rent a station and fly there? Don't they get to have fun too?
>
> 73, Jim K9YC
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|