ARRL used to be an exciting contest when US casual activity was higher and
conditions better to Europe (I do not mean EI, F and G). We talk back in
1980 and 1990. Nowdays, the casual activity from the US makes Run from
Europe and Asia very limited, except for the biggest guns.
As Igor UA9CDC pointed out, ARRL can be a very sleepy exercise for stations
in North Europe, the Baltics, European and Asiatic Russia. No rates, too
few North American stations in S&P mode, just the big US guns running.
I have been operating RDXC three times seriously from SK3W in the past 5-6
years (M2) and RDXC is far more interesting than IARU, with better activity
in Europe and Asia for sure. Rates are good, complexity in exchanges
challenging enough, Actually a lot more exciting than exchanging
predictable ITU zones and HQ multipliers.
One can always debate if RDXC should have more points than IARU, and I
think noone would be disappointed if it had 950 (same as IARU), but now
German organizers determined that RDXC is competitive enough to motivate 50
more points than IARU. As simple as that. They decide.
To compare ARRL with RDXC for those who seriously have worked both contests
is hard. Rates in ARRL are for sure excellent for Caribbean stations
working North America, and for a few other big guns located in nice
locations in North Africa and the very western part of Europe. But for us
others, ARRL is certainly a contest that should not have the same amount of
points as a worldwide contest like RDXC. That some nations for some reasons
have not shown interest in RDXC as WW contest is another cup of tea... For
me as a European, I definitely rate RDXC as one of the most challenging and
most interesting WW contests. More interesting than WPX where basicaly
every unique station is a mult. However, I miss American participation and
that is why yagis rather point east than west. If US activity was higher,
be sure people would turn antennas that way in RDXC.
I think the question that really is important, despite what Yury VE3DZ
said... is if Assisted and Non Assisted should be awarded equally. And few
seem to realize that this has implications of future contesting with a much
higher importance than 50 points more or less for RDXC. What amazes me is
that top contesters claim that discussion "endless and useless". It
certainly is everything but useless in my understanding.
73 de Mats SM6LRR (RM2D)
2014-12-08 19:28 GMT+03:00 Igor Sokolov <ua9cdc@gmail.com>:
> Dave,
> In comparison of ARRL vs RDXC as contests suitable for selection, there is
> one more important point.
> RDXC is world wide, mixed mode 24 hour contest and therefore mimics IARU
> much better then ARRL where the world works US/VE only for 48 hours and
> only on one mode.
> Besides RDXC is much higher rate contest when compared to ARRL.
> I think the choice of the organizers was absolutely correct.
>
> 73, Igor UA9CDC
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Siddall" <hhamwv@gmail.com>
> To: <wrtc2018@lists.wrtc2018.de>; <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Cc: "Igor Sokolov" <ua9cdc@gmail.com>
> Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 6:19 PM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Fwd: WRTC 18 Qualifying
>
>
> Igor,
>>
>> The submitted logs demonstrate that RDXC is VERY competitive for RU
>> stations and ARRL is VERY competitive for U.S. stations, but much less so
>> outside their respective countries notwithstanding rules differences.
>> That's precisely why they should have been treated as equivalents
>> notwithstanding that ARRL draws 30 percent more logs than RDXC. In 2014,
>> RDXC 3193, ARRL 4156 logs (average CW/SSB).
>>
>> They both are well-run and fun contests, but not matches for the truly
>> worldwide competition that CQWW & CQWPX draw; and IARU is, after all, the
>> foundation contest for WRTC, maybe competitors should demonstrate mastery
>> of the summer propagation conditions that they will face during the WRTC
>> itself.
>>
>> But that now is history. WRTC2018 elected not to reconsider their rules,
>> so enjoy and see you on the bands.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Dave K3ZJ
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 12:12 AM, Igor Sokolov <ua9cdc@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Dave,
>>> Can you support your statement regarding the number of participants in
>>> RDXC, IARU and WPX with solid figures?
>>> ARRL, that was part of 2014 WRTYC selection, for me is truly regional
>>> contest where unlike RDXC we can only work US and VE and therefore pretty
>>> dull from areas where propagation to NA last only few hours. In RDXC you
>>> can work any one anywhere wich does not fit the discription of a
>>> regional
>>> contest but rather WW contest.
>>> I have done ARRL couple of times from the very well equipped setup with
>>> multiple stacks to only make 500-600 QSOs in 48 hours while 3000 QSO in
>>> 24
>>> hours in RDXC is not uncommon from almost anywhere.
>>>
>>> 73, Igor UA9CDC
>>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|