[Cwo] 2014 CW Open Award Structure

[Peter Chamalian W1RM]

I don't think it makes sense to have a trophy at all.  Here's why:
The trophy will always be won by the high power entry.  
There is no way that the low power entry can match the score of the high
power entry.  
Giving a trophy and a plaque is redundant.  
ICOM has combined the overall 3 session winner and (if that person wins one
or more of the individual sessions) into one plaque.

If we do want to do a trophy then I think the trophy should only go to the
overall three session winner in each category, not just high power.

I don't know the cost of the trophies but if ICOM is willing to buy three of
them, how about CWops buys 6 more and give the trophy to the combined
session winner in the three categories.

As for plaques, I recently purchased one from a local vendor.  The plaque
was not engraved but rather "printed" on specially coated material that
formed the plaque.  The cost for an 8-1/2 x 11 plaque was under 30 and that
was for one.  I would suspect the cost for multiples would earn a discount.

Speaking of the 2013 plaques, mine has yet to arrive.

For what it's worth...


Pete, W1RM

-----Original Message-----
From: cwo-bounces at kkn.net [mailto:cwo-bounces at kkn.net] On Behalf Of D Faklis
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2014 7:50 AM
To: cwo at kkn.net
Subject: [Cwo] 2014 CW Open Award Structure

Let's have a discussion on a new award structure that can be designed to
further enhance international participation in CWO.

The current award structure is as follows:

1. Trophy for 1st place in each session.
2. Plaque for 1st place in each power level in each session 3. Trophy for
overall combined score of all three sessions.
4. Plaque for 1st place for each power level in the combined score group.
Note: if the same entrant wins multiple awards, they may be combined.

In fact, in 2013, ICOM made the decision to combine awards.  One trophy and
six plaques were issued.

The CWO continues to grow both inside and outside of NA, but the current
award structure favors the region with the most participation.  Perhaps we
can come up with a cost-efficient method to incentivize amateurs in all ITU
Regions 1, 2, and 3.

Given three regions, three power levels, and three sessions, along with a
budget that might be constant relative to 2013, we'll likely need to form a
compromise.  Please circulate comments on this topic on this reflector.
Thanks!

73, Dean, NW2K

_______________________________________________
Cwo mailing list
Cwo at kkn.net
http://www.kkn.net/mailman/listinfo/cwo