Folks,
I've got to chime in on this one. I'm coming from the perspective of someone
who's built an 11-band station from the ground up, and is actively involved
in Microwave contesting, in addition to holding down some good numbers on
the lower-4 bands.
1) "contest are defacto microwave" - Yep. And they should be. But what Gene
DOES NOT address, is that those folks who HAVE 11-band stations don't
isolate themselves above 900MHz. I don't. My voice keyer/CW keyer is always
running on 6 or 2m. As a matter of fact - in order to maintain ranking in
the top-10 in SOHP Unlimited - you HAVE to work everyone. Otherwise, you
don't make the Top-10. I spend lots of time waiting to work people on the
microwaves, which keeps me hunting/pouncing/running the lower bands. If we
miss, it's no different than any other contesting event - we're both busy at
the same time. NO harm in that. If someone doesn't work me, I highly doubt
they wouldn't want to submit a log because of it.
2) "contests are boring" - sure they are. ALL contests are boring. At times.
The thrill of working someone in a rare grid, or making a new long-haul QSO
on 10GHz is thrilling. One per contest is enough to make it worthwhile. For
the non-contester, I think it'd be just as exciting to work something
new/rare, thus making it more enjoyable. For that, conditions can help - but
the ARRL nor CQ can fully control the propagation mechanisms, making it a
crapshoot every time.
3) "change scoring metrics" - well, now THAT would encourage growth and
development. Yep. Let's REDUCE the incentives for having lots of bands -
just so they can be worked by anyone who doesn't feel like spending the time
/ energy to do the same. (Cynicism key OFF) Does ANYONE believe that making
disincentives will help VHF+ contesting? If someone like me has 11-bands,
then doesn't it make sense that I have a bigger score? Of course it does.
Why do I have 11 bands? Because I enjoy it, breaking stuff and fixing it
again. Does that mean I should always be in the top-10? Maybe. Does that
mean someone with an IC-706 shouldn't be? Nope. If they work more stations,
in more grids than I do - they deserve to win.
4) "Differentiate" - I don't understand the point of this one. If the intent
is to make some "lower-4" contests, to encourage log entries - then won't
people already limited in time to operate NOT operate the flagship contests,
driving down participation even farther? No, I don't believe we need that.
Here's where I jump around a bit (as there's no real ability for me to
comment about Rover rules, etc - since I don't do that)
5) "Too Long" - They are too SHORT as it is, I think. We start ARRL contests
at 1900Z, end at 0359Z that Sunday. 34 Hours of bliss. Don't HF contests run
48 hours? And to be in the top-10 of those, 46 of the 48 are needed? And Why
are they so wildly successful? Ain't length of time, that's for sure. Making
time changes are smart ideas, but don't make em shorter. In the ARRL
contests, since time immemorial - everyone knows the duration. So if they
only have time to get on between 10pm - 11pm EST Sunday night, by god they
know when it ends.
The one suggestion I'd seen, which makes ABSOLUTE SENSE to me - is making
new classes of operating. I'd have to believe, that making new categories
such as SOLP Limited, SOHP Limited, etc - would encourage greater
submissions. Do that, rather than remove incentives for guys like me to get
on and play. I, for one, refuse to watch a batch of rules changes intent on
making my investment obsolete - for the favor of WHAT? More log submissions?
The suggestions seemed a bit dramatic, if you ask me. Gene is an operator
for K8GP, one of the most SUCCESSFUL groups in the VHF+ contests, and
actively operates 432 and above from there. They can, as a matter of course,
run up over 100 QSOs on 903 and 1296, and big scores on the microwave bands
- in addition to tremendous numbers on the lower 4. Why he thinks all these
changes are needed, when they can on any given contest, beat out all but
W2SZ/1? Contest sponsors want log numbers up. I don't believe any of the
suggestions, except adding new operating classes, will help them get there.
Mark, K2AXX
ABCD9EFGHI(J)(K)L ()=work in progress
FN12cs, Geneseo NY
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------
I'm a bit surprised there hasn't been any mention of W3ZZ's article
regarding VHF contesting that appeared in April QST. Here are my thoughts.
First thanks to Gene and ARRL for showing an interest in improving the level
of parcipitation in VHF/UHF contest. Although I operated in VHF contest as
far back as 1963, I was out of the hobby until the June 2001 contest. So I
was not aware of the general decline in the number of logs submitted. While,
frankly, I could care less if people submit logs I hate to see a decline in
participation. Based on the data Gene presented, I don't doubt there has
been a decline in participation. As for Gene's major points starting with
"contest are defacto microwave". Interesting point and I agree with Gene's
conclusion. When I resumed VHF contesting I knew I had no chance of winning
(or even scoring high) due to the scoring rules. For me it didn't matter but
I can see that others might be detered by this.
"Contest are boring" Well not for me. As for FM operators, perhaps a short
contest within a contest might be attractive to a small percentage. However
I suspect most are just not interested.
"Change the scoring metrics" Although I agree with Gene's basic point, it's
no big deal for me. "Differentiate" Strongly agree with this. I would be in
favor of a lower four bands only contest. I like the CQ 6n2 contest for the
same reason.
"Rover rules" (I'm a rover.) While I would like to see some modification in
the rover rules I would not go back to the old ones. However it does
irritate me that I often operate from a grid and don't work anyone else in
that grid. Just allowing grid credit for each grid activate on each band
would work for me. IE if I make a contact on 222 from CM86 I get credit for
CM86 on 222. If the contact was with a different grid square I receive
credit for it also.
"Too long" Frankly I dont' see much value in allowing 24hr a day operation.
Perhaps a 30 out 48 rule (Rovers and multi-ops exempted). Another idea is to
have a six hour catagory for people who want to participate causally. .
"Too many" Don't agree. Out here there is little activity in other than the
three ARRL contest.
"Robot/Cabrillo" While these are a hassle I doubt it's a signiificant cause
of the decline in participation. Casual operators can still use paper logs
and big contest stations has logging software (don't they?).
Well those are my thoughts, how about yours??? 73 Tom KE6FI/R
|