I think Ed just want to know exactly what he is asking about NA·1
qualification sector (W1, W2, W3)
I think is the same in every wrtc, you can check how it works here
https://wrtc2018.de/competition/qualificationresults.php?value=NA+%231&task=area
73,
Jorge
CX6VM/CW5W
El mié, 25 oct 2023 a las 9:04, rjairam@gmail.com (<rjairam@gmail.com>)
escribió:
> That may seem so but in W2 competing with W1 seems lopsided.
>
> For example someone competing in central NJ with coastal Maine will have
> two vastly different propagation conditions. We are talking strong morning
> band openings 2-3 hours earlier in W1 Maine compared to W2.
>
> Unless you have a superstation like RHR summit which is on the same
> latitude as W1 then you stand a chance. If not, forget it.
>
> I mean if you’re going to just select the best of the best of the best
> (with honors) in that whole encompassing W1-W3 region maybe just forget the
> whole selection process and just pick all the big guns from W1.
>
> Ria
> N2RJ
>
> On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 7:37 AM Tonno Vahk <tonno.vahk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Introduction of those score comparison areas within a single
> qualification
> > area is a horrible idea. They did the same in EU1 (splitting Baltics and
> > Scandinavia) and pretty much destroyed motivation to participate for many
> > Baltic ops.
> >
> > It is absurd and unfair and also seems to be complicated enough to take
> > more than 5 emails to explain to someone as shown below.
> >
> > It distorts the results completely and works in an opposite way to an
> > expected WRTC concept of selecting best ops.
> >
> > It clearly favors less active sub region. The bigger the difference
> > between the number of competitve entrats in sub regions the more
> distorted
> > it becomes.
> >
> > For example.
> >
> > In W3 there are 3 active contesters who take a serious shot at WRTC
> place.
> >
> > In W1 and W2 there are 10 such entrants.
> >
> > So in W3 those 3 ops share between themselves the top scores from all
> > qualification contests. Even though they usually make lower scores than
> the
> > leaders in W1/2.
> >
> > In W1/2 10 entrants share the top scores and battle hard with each other.
> > They share the top scores between 10 of them in both regions.
> >
> > The result - ALL 3 qualification spots go to W3 entrants as they all have
> > higher scores given lower competition in their sub area.
> >
> > This is absolutely crazy and surely qualifies into the Top 10 of the
> worst
> > ideas of the history of humankind. The organizers completely ignore the
> > facts and reality though and in EU1 case just did this to please a
> certain
> > lobby group without ever asking for opinions of others.
> >
> > Maybe the scenario above is hypothetical in W1-3 case, I do not know. But
> > in EU1 case it is very real and the qualification race and WRTC that many
> > Baltic ops were waiting with great expectations was over for many of them
> > before it ever started.
> >
> > Something has to be done with this WRTC system to avoid every new
> > organizer turning things upside down introducing new rules as they please
> > for whatever most absurd or shady reasons. This is not how it should be
> if
> > we want to keep this thing alive.
> >
> > 73
> > ES5TV
> >
> > On 25. Oct 2023, at 03:32, Ron Notarius W3WN via CQ-Contest <
> > cq-contest@contesting.com> wrote:
> >
> > Ed, so in short, you believe that as written and as interpreted by you,
> > the current rules give an unfair advantage to the top W1, W2, and W3
> region
> > scores, compared to everyone else competing from those regions.
> >
> > Well, sorry to say, life isn’t always fair.
> >
> > But it sounds like your beef is with the WRTC 2026 Organizers.
> >
> > 73
> >
> > 73, Ron W3WN
> >
> > > On Oct 24, 2023, at 8:17 PM, Edward Sawyer <
> > EdwardS@advanced-conversion.com <mailto:EdwardS@advanced-conversion.com
> >>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Ron. Lets use this example. The W1 winner has 1,000,000 as a score
> > and I am number 2 with 950,000. W1 winner gets 1,000 points and I get
> 950
> > points. Lets say number 3 and 4 get 900,000 points and they are in W2
> and
> > W3. The old way, would have me #2 after the first contest. This new
> way,
> > has 3 people at 1,000 points and I have 950 points and I am now number 4.
> > >
> > > Simple math.
> > >
> > > Ed N1UR
> > >
> > > From: Ron Notarius W3WN <wn3vaw@verizon.net>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2023 7:48 PM
> > > To: Edward Sawyer <EdwardS@advanced-conversion.com>
> > > Cc: cq-contest@contesting.com
> > > Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WRTC Scoring Question
> > >
> > > Ed, I didn’t write, or was involved in writing, the rules, so I
> couldn’t
> > possibly answer why they were written the way you describe.
> > >
> > > I still don’t see your point. Are you saying that the rules are set up
> > to favor certain operators over others? Or just that they’re poorly
> > written... or at least not clear in their intent?
> > >
> > > 73
> > >
> > > 73, Ron W3WN
> > >
> > > On Oct 24, 2023, at 4:37 PM, Edward Sawyer <
> > EdwardS@advanced-conversion.com <mailto:EdwardS@advanced-conversion.com
> >>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Ron, Then why not say there is one TL for W1 and W2 and W3. Instead of
> > calling 3 TL from the area and then distorting the qualifying.
> > >
> > > Have 3 people “win” every contest that are all actually competing for
> > the same slots is illogical. It is NOT what you just described.
> > >
> > > Ed N1UR
> > >
> > > From: Ron Notarius W3WN <wn3vaw@verizon.net <mailto:wn3vaw@verizon.net
> >>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2023 3:37 PM
> > > To: Edward Sawyer <EdwardS@advanced-conversion.com <mailto:
> > EdwardS@advanced-conversion.com>>
> > > Cc: cq-contest@contesting.com <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
> > > Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WRTC Scoring Question
> > >
> > > I’m not sure I understand the question.
> > >
> > > There are three qualifying districts. The top score in each qualifies.
> > Simple. Right?
> > >
> > > So what’s the issue?
> > >
> > > 73, Ron W3WN
> > >
> > > On Oct 24, 2023, at 12:14 PM, Edward Sawyer <
> > EdwardS@advanced-conversion.com <mailto:EdwardS@advanced-conversion.com
> > ><mailto:EdwardS@advanced-conversion.com>> wrote:
> > > I wanted to put out the question to the group here to see if I am
> > interpreting this correctly.
> > >
> > > In the 1st qualification area of the US, there are 3 qualifying
> > districts, W1, W2, W3. If the highest score in W1 is 5 Million and the
> > highest score in W2 is 4 Million and the highest score in W3 is 3
> Million,
> > there will be 3 people that made those highest scores earning 1,000
> points
> > - assuming they are all HP Unassisted. So instead of 1 winner of the
> area
> > there are actually 3 winners of the area for every contest. And there are
> > only 3 TL selected from the W1, W2, W3 area. Even though there could
> have
> > been numerous scores much higher than the W3 score in this example, the
> W3
> > winner will get the same credit as if they had the 5 Million score.
> > >
> > > If the above is correct, this seems highly distorted. You are
> > guaranteeing 3 x 1000 point winners in the contest vs it should only
> have 1
> > x 1000 points.
> > >
> > > Please comment on whether this is in fact right. Doesn't feel
> right....
> > >
> > > Ed N1UR
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > > CQ-Contest@contesting.com <mailto:CQ-Contest@contesting.com><mailto:
> > CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
> > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > > CQ-Contest@contesting.com <mailto:CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
> > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest@contesting.com <mailto: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
> >
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
--
73,
Jorge
CX6VM/CW5W
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|