CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Absurd Rule in NAQP

To: Pete Smith N4ZR <pete.n4zr@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Absurd Rule in NAQP
From: Kelly Taylor <ve4xt@mymts.net>
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2016 23:53:12 -0600
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Every contest has its own quirks likely purposefully built in to create its own 
feel. WAE has QTCs, SS has a long exchange and work 'em once only, WW has 
everybody works everybody but some equals are more equal than others, Sprint 
has the QSY rule. CX rewards ops who use vintage equipment. 

NAQP, it seems, wants to celebrate the unassisted single op. Bravo!

If all the contests had the same rules, all the contests would be the same. 

Sometimes, the key to happiness is not trying to alter every environment to 
suit particular tastes, but rather being able to find joy in environments as 
they are. 

I find complaints about popular contests' rules are, at times, like someone 
walking into a Szechuan restaurant and saying "What, you don't make 
cheeseburgers?"

I, for one, enjoy a contest without as many crazed, RBN- and spot-driven 
pileups. But I'm not going to complain about contests that have them, either. 

73, Kelly 
ve4xt

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 16, 2016, at 3:24 PM, Pete Smith N4ZR <pete.n4zr@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> NAQP does not allow use of spotting assistance on any mode, and single-ops 
> using assistance are reclassified as Multi-two.  Then, *because they 
> areMulti-Two, they are required to adhere by the 10-minute band change rule*. 
>  When I asked one of the organizers, he first said that they had never 
> thought about it, but after a couple of back-and-forths, he affirmed that is 
> indeed how it works.
> 
> Why should we care?  First of all, because penalizing assisted single-op 
> participants in this way is a classic example of unintended consequences.  
> The band change rule was intended to prevent elaborate octopus arrangments 
> competing with genuine two transmitter multis, not to limit single-op band 
> changes.  It prevents assisted entrants from participating in one of the most 
> fun aspects of NAQP, moving stations (or being moved)  to maximize the 
> distribution of rare mults.  For people who operate assisted in other 
> contests, it prevents them from practicing high-rate assisted 
> search-and-pounce skills unless they are willing to accept a heavy handicapso 
> far as NAQP competition is concerned.
> 
> It's hard for me to understand why NAQP would cling to this antiquated 
> situation.  The other three contests reclassifying assisted single-op as 
> multi-op were ARRL 10, ARRL 160, andIARU HF.  All three have now adopted 
> Single Op Unlimited as a legitimate competitive class. When will NAQP get rid 
> of this counter-productive anachronism?
> 
> -- 
> 
> 73, Pete N4ZR
> Download the new N1MM Logger+ at
> <http://N1MM.hamdocs.com>. Check
> out the Reverse Beacon Network at
> <http://reversebeacon.net>, now
> spotting RTTY activity worldwide.
> For spots, please use your favorite
> "retail" DX cluster.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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

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