I suppose a distance scoring element is worth considering, BUT:
If we're trying to encourage folks to play, then that's yet another
discouraging factor. This stacks the decks in favor of the "big guns", since
those big stations have big stuff that can make the most of the big distance
points. If the emphasis is on creating parity in scoring nationally - then
its another story. Grid squares, for the most part, are the same distance
apart (unless a rover goes SO far north that he can do 20 in an hour) so
working lots of em gets to be tough by the nature of VHF+.
That said, population density still determines scoring. Distance may even it
some, but the quantities of people to work still plays an important role in
beefing up a score. F'rinstance, guys in the Central US work both coasts on
6m via Es. Now that's big points + Big QSOs. BUT- if I work a double-hop
opening to the west coast, that's bigger points per QSO. And I still have
the advantage of large #s of QSOs available. In this model, I can't see
distance scoring making a huge difference. Mebbe I'm wrong.
On 2m and above, normal tropospheric scatter between big stations can be
upwards of 500 miles. Less for smaller stations. That means, guys on
mountains will trounce guys in valleys. Conversely, if that valley happens
to be the HUDSON valley - then lots of QSOs go in the log. That might
nullify the huge advantages that distance scoring could offer.
This problem has been discussed for years, with the current rules still in
force after all this talk. Again, the issue is activity overall. Period. If
ham radio activity is dropping, wouldn't you naturally expect this trend to
be magnified in high-profile events such as contests? I'd assume so. So what
does this all mean?
I dunno...
Mark, K2AXX
ABCD9EFGHIJL
FN12cs
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ed Kucharski [mailto:k3dne@adelphia.net]
> Sent: Friday, April 11, 2003 1:16 PM
> To: Thomas Viselli; VHFcontesting@contesting.com; tree@kkn.net
> Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] W3ZZ's QST Contesting Article
>
>
> I hope to make this my final post on this subject - I've said
> enough and I
> don't want to wear out my welcome BUT just a few more points
> from some
> recent posts. This topic has taken up a lot of bandwidth on
> the reflector
> - seems like we have done a good job of identifying a problem
> and there has
> been many good posts suggesting solutions to the problem of
> the apparent
> decreasing participation and log submission in vhf+ contests.
> What can we
> do now? Here is my plan and what I'm gonna do (FWIW).
>
> At 04:30 PM 4/10/2003 -0400, Thomas Viselli (K2UOP) wrote:
> So I think if we, as contesters, want to hear more activity
> during contests
> and see more submissions, we have to be more active during
> other periods.
> When we work other newbees during the year we have to talk up
> contests with
> them and get them as excited about this activity within ham
> radio as we are.
>
> -Tom is right on the money - we need to get on the air more
> in non-contest,
> non-band opening times. I am very guilty of not getting on
> for a number of
> reasons but I will make an concerted attempt to get on vhf+
> at least 1
> evening a week (it ain't much but it's 1 more eve a week than
> I get on now).
>
> At 02:56 PM 4/10/2003 -0500, Tree wrote:
> When we work someone with a new rig, but no antenna for 432, do we
> encourage them to get on and give it a try? Maybe we offer
> to loan them an
> antenna to get on.
>
> -I have multiple extra antennas (2 for 6m, 3 for 2m, 1.5 for
> 222, 2 for
> 432, 1 for 903 and 1 for 1296MHz), a 20ft. crank up mast and
> a Create Log
> Periodic that covers 50 - 1296MHz (that is presently
> for-sale) sitting in
> my shed and garage that I will make available as loaners to
> get someone on
> a new band for any of the upcoming contests. I used these antennas
> pre-kids for many of my qrp portable expeditions and most
> recently in the
> June 2000 VHF contest from FN00 that I op'd with N3II. My
> only special
> request is that they be returned in as close to the same
> condition as when
> they were borrowed. If I don't get any bites here I will
> make the same
> offer on my local club reflector (PVRC).
>
> At 02:56 PM 4/10/2003 -0500, Tree wrote:
> Most of the HF contest writeups are done by non QST staff. If you are
> passionate about VHF contesting, why not consider putting
> that passion into
> a writeup?
>
> -Okay, thanks to Tree's suggestion I have recently
> volunteered to write a
> vhf-uhf contesting article (maybe 2 or 3 a year) for a local
> publication
> (AUTOCALL) that will be targeted at the non-vhf+ contester,
> non-contester
> and the HT/FM only crowd. I hope to provide enough info and
> enthusiasm to
> get some of those folks to participate in this year's June
> VHF QSO Party
> and other vhf+ contests. Any advise, hints and ideas for
> these articles
> will be appreciated.
>
> At 11:56 AM 4/11/2003 -0400, Ed Kucharski wrote:
> There have been multiple posts that have indicated the
> contest results
> should stay in QST - I agree.
>
> -I will email my SM, Dan Henderson and the Contest Advisory
> Committee my
> feelings on this subject to try to convince ARRL to reconsider their
> position of taking the line scores out of QST and I will
> suggest leaving an
> abridged write-up with line scores and top ten boxes in QST
> and a more
> detailed expanded web report on-line.
>
> Lastly, I plan on op'g as many of the vhf+ contests as
> possible (I usually
> put in a full time effort in Jan, June and Sept) and
> part-time efforts in
> the sprints, CQVHF, and UHF contests. I hope to add another band
> (3456MHz?) within the next year with my eye on expansion thru
> 10GHz too.
>
> What can you do / we do as a group to encourage more vhf+ contest
> participation and log submissions???
>
> 73 and CU in the next vhf+ contest,
> Ed K3DNE
> FM19
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> VHFcontesting mailing list
> VHFcontesting@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
>
|