Gerry gets it.
Please name one other sport where the playing field is so unlevel or
unfair. There are none. The only reason it is acceptable in our sport
is that the people in charge of these contests happen to be located where?
The same people in the same geographically advantaged areas continue to
rally against any changes at the detriment to Ham Radio and especially
contesting.
The cries from every other part of the world continue to fall on deaf
ears. Will it ever change? Do those in charge really care?
W0MU
On 5/9/2017 7:29 PM, Gerry Hull wrote:
If you think I'm complaining, I'm not. You've missed my point. I don't
give a hoot -- I enjoy the game, and finishing behind those 8-station guys
in M/S is just fine with me.
It just keeps eliminating more and more people from the game. Exactly what
we don't want. That's my only worry.
73, Gerry W1VE
On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 9:20 PM, Ria Jairam <rjairam@gmail.com> wrote:
Why all this complaining I wonder? We have stations griping about how it's
not "fair" and how people have "too many advantages."
Guess what - life is not fair!!! In sports the bigger, stronger, faster
one will win. In radio sport the big guns closer to advantageous areas and
who can do SO2R will win. That's just how it is. If you're out west and
tired of being beaten, then come pay the high taxes and enjoy the harsh
winters out east. Or maybe pay a remote service and use one of their
stations in Maine or New York and win a plaque. Turn key plug and play.
Meaningless in my eyes (YOU didn't build that), but if you're so badly
after a plaque that is one way.
I have a single tower station with one radio and one amp. I do fairly
well. I win the district sometimes and even squeak my way into the top 10
sometimes. I'm happy with that, but I could improve and do better in the
placement. But let's be honest. Someone could dump a ton of money and build
a multi tower station complete with low band 4 squares. They'll beat me. Is
that fair? Maybe it isn't. But I'm not going to knee cap them because I
want to win. I just deal with it.
Ria
N2RJ
On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 7:57 PM Gerry Hull <gerry@yccc.org> wrote:
I have no problem with Dual CQ SO2R, Yuri. These are great advances in
technique and show excellent operator skill and innovation.
Time Division Multiplexing 8 operators and radios to a "single" radio,
IMHO, is not the same thing and is not in the spirit of the rules. It is
simply a technology technique which is within the letter of the rules, but
not the spirit.
Yes, I have to accept it if the rules may not change. I DO accept it...
However, I don't think it is a good way to encourage new M/S teams to
participate.
We all have our opinions, these are mine.
73, Gerry W1VE
On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 6:14 PM, Yuri <ve3dz@rigexpert.net> wrote:
Gerry,
Isn't SO2R Dual CQ operation (a-la CT1BOH, N6MJ etc.) is the same type
of
<quote> "elimination of a lot of people from ever being in contention
for
top spots in the category" <unquote>?
All that you said below is true for ANY category.
I think it's all about the rules.
If they aren't broken and they allow to do such, then... one either
needs
to change the rules or has to accept the fact. Maybe it's time to
research
some other ways to attract (more) new competitors, like doing more
WRTC-style (live) competitions during June FDays, working more closely
with
schools, colleges and other youth organizations and so on...
Best regards,
Yuri VE3DZ
-----Original Message-----
From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf
Of
Gerry Hull
Sent: Tuesday, May 9, 2017 10:28 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] What is Multi to you?
Interesting Thread.
I've been contesting over 40 years. In all that time, 99% of my efforts
have been at M/S or M/2 stations.
For more than 30 of those years, a multi-single was a station with one
main radio and one multiplier radio.
With a single tower and a good antenna complement, winning M/S in North
America has been possible with two radios. We did it at more than one
station.
If you read my comments on CQ Contest, you know that I don't live in the
past -- I love technology, and advancing the state of the art is where
I'm
at.
However, in this case, I think the case of N radios in a M/S is a
bastardization of M/S. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
I applaud the Huge M/S multi-radio efforts by K1LZ and others -- very
cool
technology -- but all that does is eliminate a lot of people from ever
being in contention for top spots in the category. If you look at the
size
of the scores in these 5-to-10 radio Multi-singles, they are completely
out
of line with "traditional" multi-singles.
In CQWW, there used to be a category for "experimental" operations ...
I'm sure those guys building those huge M/S operations would not accept
being put in to such a category... However, how do we encourage new
stations, and long-time "traditional" M/S stations to compete in the
category?
Since there are not a HUGE number of these Many-TX-interlocked M/S, and
they love to one-up each other -- why not let them compete in a
category of
their own?
There's lots of technology/technique happening in the M/S space without
going to such extremes.
73,
Gerry W1VE
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|