> The most simple, most fair and best scoring scheme is undoubtably the
> method used in The Stew Perry Top Band Distance Challenge. Everything
> counts and DX is really DX....a station remote from your location.
Yep, I've given a lot of thought to distance-based scoring systems,
originally motivated by the 8P6J vs 9Y4VT scores of years past in
CQWW. How exactly does one measure performance?
Based on the current scoring rules in CQWW, we have established that
the consistently best places are EA8, CT3, PJ9, P4 and 9Y4, with the
occasional ZD8, EA9, PY0 or HC8 turning up on top. Naturally, the
motivated travellers are rushing to get to these places and win.
I've often wondering what would happen if we changed things around so
that QSOs were given a point value based on distance, each 2000 miles
counting a point. JA-W6 would be 2.5 points. G-W1 would be 1.6
points. LU-EA would be 3.1 points. JA-PY2 would be 5.6 points.
It would be interesting to how people's habits would change. Would
everyone suddenly be rushing to reserve a spot in 4S7 or Spratly to
challenge for the SOAB trophy? Would we declare ZP5JCY to be king?
Going through and crunching some logs would be great fodder for a
magazine article. I simply haven't been able to find the motivation
to do it.
--Trey, N5KO
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|