In many ways, 160M ops and VHF ops are sisters under the skin. I think
that most people that are proposing a distance based scoring system
would base it on The Stew Perry Challenge:
< http://jzap.com/k7rat/stew.rules.txt >
Here are the scoring rules:
5. QSO Points: The number of QSO points for each contact depends on
the distance between the two stations. This is computed by taking the
distance between the centers of the two grid squares. Count a minimum
of one point per QSO and an additional point for every 500 kilometers
distance. For example, a QSO with a station 1750 kilometers away will
count for 4 QSO points. No additional distance for long path is
allowed. QSO Points are multiplied by 2X if you work a low power
station and 4X for working a QRP station. This is done based upon
received logs and is computed automatically during the log checking
process.
Clearly this would need to be modified for VHF contests; among other
things the grid square criteria is too coarse and the distance breaks
for points are too long but the basic idea certainly has merit. One
can look at the path loss vs distance tropo scatter plots to get some
ideas of where to place the breaks.
The above scoring technique gives more points for working low power
and QRP stations. Along with the additional points for distance, there
is an incentive to work the weak ones. A similar multiplier could be
given to working rovers.
While a GPS is certainly the best way to get a 6 digit grid square,
one can also mark off topo maps or other high resolution maps with the
6 digit grid square and figure out where you are manually. Others have
suggested methods for scoring if one only knows the 4 digit grid square.
I think everyone at a fixed station can determine their 6 digit grid
square. For rovers, it is a bit harder without a GPS, but still
possible.
The ARRl has 3 QSO parties, or contests if you will, that are
essentially identical. it would be nice if there were some variety.
The VUCC has proposed alternates in the past, among them limiting the
number of bands in the June contest. These proposals have never been
too popular, but the 2008 June contest certainly shows why it should
be done. With 6M open, few pay attention to the higher bands. Of
course the 2007 June contest shows just the opposite. Six meters
giveth and six meters taketh away.
The September contest seems to be the ideal venue in which to try new
scoring methods. Perhaps if we begin now, we can put together a
proposal for such a contest that could be conducted in September of
2009? Or perhaps we could exchange 6 digit grid squares in the
September contest and submit the logs to an independent adjudicator
for distance scoring? The ARRL robot will accept 6 digit grids, so
exchanging more than is required is not a problem.
One could also have a contest based on "nonperformance" multipliers,
or multipliers that are obtained less on skill and location, and more
on serendipity. A VHF contest with multipliers based on prefixes as
multipliers would be such a contest, although rovers would not play
much of a role in such a contest.
Just some thoughts. It would be much more interesting if the 3 VHF/UHF
contests were differentiated from each other in some way. I hope that
the VUCC continues to pursue this option, despite the poor reception
such efforts have received in the past. And whatever you do, don't
forget us rovers! - Duffey
--
KK6MC
James Duffey
Cedar Crest NM
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|