Why do we need "special incentive" for those who S&P vs Running? The choice
between the two is a tactical one. You Run when you can, when rate is
obtainable, otherwise you S&P because either rate isn't obtainable or
conditions make
multiplier hunting advantageous. This is a matter of strategy no matter the
size of the station.
Excessive zeal toward leveling the playing field will accomplish nothing more
than to reduce incentive for contesters to learn skills, and build
competitive stations. If we follow this path to its ultimate conclusion, we
will end up
with a situation where half the logs submitted are awarded 1st place and the
remaining are awarded 2nd place. Thats not a competition, there is no sense of
accomplishment when we remove the reward for improving and gaining skill. We
can argue that S&P or Running requires skill and we would be correct on both
counts, a contester needs both skills to win. Favoring one skill over the other
would alter strategy and reward one style over the other, and to some degree
taking away operator choice. Competitors in all sports need the full spectrum
of skills and good equipment, otherwise they dont win in their chosen sport.
If you want to level the playing field do it by improving operator skills and
station building abilities. Unlike some people (non contesters) think,
contesting has contributed more to the radio art than Qrm on the bands every
weekend. Much of the knowledge about antennas and propagation was discovered or
confirmed by contesters trying to improve either their operating skills or
their
stations. Remove the incentive to improve these areas and the reward of
contesting is no longer the sense of satisfaction earned by self improvement
and
accomplishment.
The theory that throwing money at the situation is how the winners got to
where they are has been stated hundreds of times in the last several decades.
The theory has been put into practice numerous times during the same decades
and
has failed over and over. I have been associated with several winning multi
operator stations over these same decades and they all have the same thing in
common. They all had owner/builder's who enjoyed building efficient stations
and had acquired a great deal of knowledge about a wide variety of relevant
subjects. None of them fit the description of an owner/builder who threw money
at
the situation. All of these builders did design and build antennas and other
equipment. All of these builders did a massive amount of research. The
operators that were attracted to these stations almost always learned their
skills
first as single operators from smaller home stations. I cant remember a single
case of a successful contest station where everything was ordered from a ham
equipment catalogue, and the operators relied on a mathematical formula to
compensate for lack of operator skill.
Ron KH6DV
HO3R operator (Half-Operator Three-Radio)
Not talented enough for SO2R
---------------------------------------------------------------
The world's top contesters battle it out in Finland!
THE OFFICIAL FILM of WRTC 2002 now on professional DVD and VHS!
http://home1.pacific.net.sg/~jamesb/
---------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|