> Given the most normalized "level playing field" (equal station/antenna
> suite, compact geographic situation to equalize propagation, etc.), WRTC
> showcases operator skills and experience. Who has the best instincts for
> band changes, the best balance between running vs mult harvesting? Who
> understands the chinks in propagation charts to best catch a short band
> opening to grab some scarce mults, and yes, even who knows the best ways
> to
> provoke a cluster spot?
Ah, so you acknowledge that there may be some skill required to use spots to
your advantage... interesting.
But you misunderstood my proposals, none of them would limit band changes,
only the specific frequencies or how long one could cq on a specific
frequency. This is a common element in sprints already today which many
operators find an interesting challenge. Adding some variation of that to
wrtc may help equalize the spotting field, if indeed that is desirable.
David Robbins K1TTT
e-mail: mailto:k1ttt@arrl.net
web: http://www.k1ttt.net
AR-Cluster node: 145.69MHz or telnet://dxc.k1ttt.net
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Radio K0HB [mailto:kzerohb@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2010 02:40
> To: K1TTT; 'CQ CONTEST'
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] List of WRTC
> stations/Results/Overspottinganditsimpact
>
> Dave, your "logical" solutions fly directly in the fact of the premise
> which
> drives WRTC.
>
>
> I love the "equal station/location" idea of leveling the physical tools,
> just like race cars have rules governing the "equipment", and thus
> highlighting the competitive skills sets. But the "leveling" should end
> there. The players "on the field" should run unfettered, free to succeed
> (or not) without "operating regulations" such as you propose.
>
> I offer again Kurt Vonnegut's classic about "leveling of skills" ---->
> http://www.tnellen.com/cybereng/harrison.html
>
> 73, de Hans, K0HB
> --
> "Just a boy and his radio"
> --
> Proud Member of:
> A1 Operators - http://www.arrl.org/a-1-op
> MWA - http://www.W0AA.org
> TCDXA - http://www.tcdxa.org
> CADXA - http://www.cadxa.org
> LVDXA - http://www.lvdxa.org
> CWOps - http://www.cwops.org
> SOC - http://www.qsl.net/soc
> TCFMC - http://tcfmc.org
> --
> Sea stories here ---> http://k0hb.spaces.live.com/
> Request QSL at ---> http://www.clublog.org/logsearch/K0HB
> All valid QSL requests honored with old fashioned paper QSL!
> LoTW participant
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "K1TTT" <K1TTT@ARRL.NET>
>
> >..... then there are a couple logical solutions.
> >
> > 1. use a sprint like qsy rule so that any spot for a cqing wrtc station
> is
> > only good for one qso... don't let them ping pong, require 3 or more
> > frequencies a fair distance apart, or that they answer a cq from someone
> > else in between calling cq, or some similar combination to keep them
> from
> > holding a frequency and attracting packet pileups.
> >
> > 2. assign a specific range of frequencies at equal intervals on each
> band,
> > published in advance and require each station to stay on their assigned
> > frequency for some time period then qsy to another specific frequency,
> at
> > any time each station would probably have to have a specific frequency
> on
> > each band/mode that rotated every half hour or some other frequent time
> > interval. This way the frequencies would all be known in advance, but
> > which
> > station would be there wouldn't be. This would remove frequency
> selection
> > but not band selection from the operator skill set, which could be a
> > detractor or another way to level the playing field by not letting the
> > teams
> > choose the specific frequency they were on at any time. This would make
> > dx
> > spots less useful since anyone looking for a wrtc station would know
> what
> > frequencies to check.
>
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|