Reflectorites:
Thanks to W3ZZ and others for initiating this conversation. Even
though some people seem to be tiring of it, for me this discussion helps
get the juices flowing in anticipation of the June contest. Having read
many diverse opinions, here are some of mine. I will give the short
version of each, but would be happy to discuss any of these points in
more detail with anybody who is interested:
One: In general, I believe that the VHF/UHF contests are not broken and
the rules should remain essentially as they are. In most of these
contests, the concept is pure and simple: work as many stations as
possible in as many grids as possible. Easy to do, easy to log, easy to
score, but having real operating challenges. Fundamental Qs, and
geography that should appeal to newcomer and oldtimer alike.
Also, I think the array of contests is good; various seasons, various
emphases. Not too many, not too few. I do regret that the ARRL disowned
the single-band sprints, after which participation went way down.
However, the sprints still exist, and I am sure that we can increase
participation if we all promote them more (especially at the local level).
Two: I think it would be unwise to add new categories of competition.
Consider this: In the general ARRL contests we already have five fixed
entry categories (a, b, l, m, and q) for which section championship
awards are given in 80 ARRL/RAC sections. Therefore, a potential of 400
section championships are awarded (in the three general ARRL contests)!
Added to that are rover divisional champs, plus division winners in other
categories. With a little creative thinking, just about anybody can win a
section championship (although some, like me, have to do it another
section). Adding more categories will actually dilute competition and we
will be approaching a situation not unlike giving a fancy trophy to every
kid who steps at least once onto the soccer field. I might not be
opposed, however, to adding emphasis to single-band winners.
The existing rules and categories present a great variety of
opportunities. Basically, we already have something for everybody (in most
contests). In the general ARRL contests, Multiop and limited Multiop can
accommodate big guns as well as any collection of people who can scrape
together a few rigs and antennas. Such operations provide ample
opportunity to invite and train newcomers. Some groups do this; more
should. We have two options for single op home stations and two
portable/rover options. Just about anybody with any kind of station can
choose a category that fits.
Three: Do not introduce a new "distance-based" scoring system. It would
decrease log submissions and, more importantly, we already have
distance-based scoring! The station that can work out farther can work
increasingly more grids. By my rough (eyeball) calculation, a station in
Kansas City has 31 grids within 200 miles and 53 grids within 300 miles.
It is not a linear relationship: as distance increases, the number of
available grids increases at a greater rate. If we complicate the rules,
more casual operators will not bother to calculate their score and will
not submit logs.
By the way, I realize that both the current system and the proposed system
that counts distance based on adjacency of grids are somewhat biased
geographically. Grids get larger as we approach the equator and smaller
toward the poles. Within the contiguous 48 states, the difference is
noticeable, although not great. In northern Minnesota grids are about 93
miles east-west, and in southern Mississippi they are about 116 miles
wide. And, of course, having lived in Los Angeles for fifteen years, I am
fully aware of the "half-circle" of grids available to those on the coasts
(but the current distance reward still applies there).
Four: The way to improve participation is to promote the contests. Many
good suggestions already have been made, so I wont repeat any of them.
Promotion at all levels, from national to local is probably the key to
increasing participation in VHF/UHF contests. I too would prefer to see
line scores in QST, but I must say that the Web data are simply great.
You can sort scores in almost any way you want, and really find out what
people are doing. As more and more people discover how neat this Web
feature is, I wouldn't doubt that interest will increase.
73, Curt Roseman, k9aks
p.s listen carefully for me in June; weak signal QRP portable, somewhere
in the Midwest
|