CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Dumbing-Down Contests?

To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Dumbing-Down Contests?
From: "Warren C. Stankiewicz" <nf1j@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 08:29:25 -0800
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
The original question posed, as I recall, was trying to make the point of "it's 
broke, and we need to fix it."

And there certainly have been a number of very creative suggestions as to how 
to go about this, as well as some characterizations of the same.

I can see the argument that if you make a contest everyone can operate in, 
everyone will operate in it. I don't necessarily agree with that, or the 
assumption that "A" automatically implies "B".

The deeper question, of course, is "Are people not operating in a contest 
because the exchange is too hard?" I may hear that complaint from a number of 
contesters in the upper echelons of our sport, but I'm certainly not hearing it 
from the rank and file, much less from the casual participant or observer. Yet 
these are the people are the heart and soul of any contest. Is anyone hearing 
them complain?

Yes, in the four big ARRL contests (DX and SS), you have to pay attention to 
the exchange. This can make them slightly more "difficult" to do well in, but 
don't get me wrong--winning either one is not something I expect to do in my 
lifetime (although one last top 10 would be nice). This factor adds a 
difference to the ARRL contests in respect to CQ WW, which is an entirely 
different animal. I don't think we need to make all contests clones.

With malice towards none,

Warren, NF1J

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

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