On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 08:02:19PM +0300, wally wrote:
> Now a volunteer with sufficient knowledge in this field can use this data and
> make "Distance Based Top Scores" listings for CQWW Contests between 2006 -
> 2008.
Only for CQWW CW 2008, which could easily be downloaded from CQWW.com.
The database file advertised earlier here on this reflector was in
some cancerous proprietery format that I could not open.
I just downloaded all CQWW CW 2008 files and analyzed them by the
following simple methodology:
a) For each unique call in all logs, a DXCC was determined by a simple
algorithm based on the CTY.DAT file and saved in a database
b) A matrix with all distances between all known DXCCs was created.
With a total of DXCC^2 entries.
c) Each CQWW CW 2008 log was recalculated by accumulated kilometers
instead if the known CQWW scoring rules.
Here we go, for two interesting categories. The columns denote:
1. Place, calculated by kilometers
2. Distance of all QSOs in km
3. Callsign
4. Actual position in CQWW 2008 results (if easily found in printed scores)
SINGLE-OP ONE NON-ASSISTED ALL HIGH FIXED
1. 45028774 V47NT 3
2. 40775552 ZS4TX (5.8m pts - not in top ten)
3. 39419835 PZ5TT 4
4. 38693640 8P5A 5
5. 36996791 V31WA 6
6. 35883301 EF8M (1?, DQ)
7. 32314061 ZF2AM (10)
8. 32120589 ZY7C --
9. 32108502 VK2IA ("only" 2.8m points)
10. 31531618 PW2D --
Top ten scorer 3V8BB (YT1AD, 1st) is at 27238661km, just below K1LZ.
CT3NT (CT1BOH) at 29775030km, below JH4UYB and 5H3EE!
MULTI-OP UNLIMITED ASSISTED ALL HIGH FIXED
1. 108586599 HC8N 1 (32m)
2 91206345 3X5A 2 (29m)
3. 55337998 JA5FDJ
4. 53295746 KH7X
5. 53263736 CT9L 3 (23m)
6. 46385052 KC1XX 4 (15m)
7. 46236480 JA3YBK
8. 45277088 K3LR 5 (14m)
9. 43290689 W3LPL
10. 41501754 HD2M
11. 37537522 EE2W (11m)
12. 36885769 LZ9W (12m)
13. 35973796 DF0HQ 6 (13m)
(LZ9W and EE2W are 2nd and 3rd in EU respectively; just opposite to
their positions calculated by the distances!)
Some scores may be missing from the results posted here. The format of
the Cabrillo headers for the categories were often not according to
the standard. Unedited results at http://fkurz.net/ham/scores9.txt
Conclusions? None.
CQWW is the name of the game and everyone knows the rules. They're
fine as they are. I like them. They encourage activities from remote
locations and don't let couch potatoes win.
"Fair" rules in a HF contest for everyone are an illusion. In terms of
pure CW skills, you may get as far as you can get to a fair judgement
if you go to an IARU HST competition. But be prepared to be beaten by
some 14 year old girls from ex-USSR countries. Now is that fair? :-)
73,
--
Fabian Kurz, DJ1YFK * Munich, Germany * http://fkurz.net/ .---.
Learn CW Online: http://lcwo.net/ | | |
| /|\ |
`---'
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|