[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] The New ARRL DX Contest

To: "CQ-CONTEST" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] The New ARRL DX Contest
From: "Rex Maner" <k7qq@netzero.net>
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 03:36:10 -0000
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>

The suggestion that the contest can't be changed is not really a serious one
I would hope, Everything thing changes.  A few years back the ARRL DX
contest was a 2 weekend afair .
I can rember operationg it from Japan and working all states on 10-15 and 20
and only missing a couple on 40.  I was disappointed when they cut it to 1
wkend, OH Well  S--t happens.  Live with it there  IS NOT  anything that can
be done to equalize the race for the top score.

Just consider this a new contest and go from there.   The object today is to
try and encourage more of the Young  Shack on the Belt types to get on HF
and get a piece of paper for the wall.

My Quack's Worth  $.02

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "ve6tn" <ve6tn@shaw.ca>
To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 18:26
Subject: [CQ-Contest] The New ARRL DX Contest

> It would appear that individuals-of-influence are now seriously
> making changes to the way ARRL DX contests are scored.
> The ARRL DX contest of the future will no longer have a single ARRL
> winner with rankings of all stations.  Instead, there will be many
> winners none of whom officially compete against each other.  Desparities
> to location or regulation will be eliminated and a contest station in VY
> will no longer compete against W1 nor would a W1 compete against W2, or
> wherever the boundaries have been drawn.  One can envision the
> where old rivals across a regional boundary from each other will now no
> longer be competitors.
> There will no longer be a single station who can claim that they won the
> ARRL DX SSB contest.  Canada will be relegated to a different status in
> ARRL and more in-line with DX.
> What about all of the old records and history of this contest?  Do they
> get recalculated based on the new criteria?  Rather than change the rules
> perhaps it is time to retire the old contest, declare it ended.  Make the
> 2005 or 2006 year the officially the last one.  This will preserve all of
> the old records and history and eliminate debate.
> Going forward the ARRL can start a "New" contest to replace the old.  Call
> it the "New ARRL DX Contest" and introduce new rules, scoring, and ranking
> that are fair for everyone.  An extensive handicap and weighting system
> could be deployed.  Individials strive to set their handicap.  Stations
> weighted against each others based on location, number of towers, height,
> antenna's.
> If the ARRL comes up with a way of normalizing one region against the
> then perhaps they could still declare weighted national results.  But this
> new comparison would have to be based on weighted criteria not on raw
> Some sort of handicap system based on geography, auroral zone, national
> rules, maybe even equipment.  The structure could be done so that there
> a ranking based on "station performance" and one based on "operator
> performance".  Just like in golf or other sports, when the technology is
> eliminated you end up with raw "skill" as the deciding factor.  This way
> those who build stations can see their ranking for their station while
> who operate get scored and ranked against each other.
> Year after year historical rankings could also be normalized using a
> weighting of SFI/A/K and geomagnetic storms.  So a solar peak year could
> compared to a solar minimum year.
> I guess I am trying to make a point.  When you change the rules where do
> draw the line?  The old rules have served us well for a long time and to
> change them really upsets the history of what this contest means.  The
> American who built a station in VY2 is to be commended in every way for an
> absolutely incredible contesting feat.  Complaining about unfairness in
> national rules or advantages of location sure comes across as sour grapes.
> If I were that person I would be very disappointed that someone would be
> trying to cheapen my victory by making claims that it was based on unfairn
> competition or that the rules were tilted.  Everyone serious at this level
> of contesting all have the same rule-book.
> If anyone wants a better contesting location than VY then here is an idea:
> Purchase property just outside St. John Newfoundland and build a
> superstation.  Your advantages would be salt water take-off, improved
> greyline timing and short signal path to Eu and AF because they are
> to England, proper skip distance/angle to duck under the auroral zone for
> those JA's, a rare ARRL section, very cheap realestate, and an incredible
> vacation opportunity as the Newfoundland people are hospitable like none
> other, the USD exchange rate is pretty good and all Amateur gear is duty
> free from anywhere in the world, and lastly you can legitimately run 2.5
> "Output" since that is Canada's power maximum and any mode can be used in
> any part of any amatuer band without band restrictions.
> Barry - VE6TN
> P.S.  If we want to add a rule to restrict Canadians to using the US band
> allocation for SSB contests, fine.  We need some sort of way to enforce
> power restrictions as well as I think someone running outside of their
> limit is a much bigger advantage than parking on a slightly lower
> and avoiding QRM.
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.4 - Release Date: 4/6/2005

CQ-Contest mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>