Thanks for the data, Chris. In the 24 hour RDXC, 9% operate full time (>23 hours). In the 48 hour CQWW SSB (using KR2Q data), 11.9% operate 24 hours or more. So, presented with a shorter contest, the
N2IC wrote: How about looking at the statistics for those major worldwide contests that are already 24 hours long, such as the IARU HF, and Russian DX ? What percentage of participants currently oper
Personally, I am not opposed to "adding another category" if doing so adds to the enjoyment of all. However, it is the sponsors who shoulder the burden of doing so. I share K5GO's argument that it sh
That's pretty much apples and pears. Operating 24 hours out of 48 is an entirely different task than operating 24 out of 24. 73, Dave AB7E On 4/1/2013 11:23 AM, Steve London wrote: How about looking
There's a pretty big difference between changing scoring (which I've never been in favor of) and aligning categories to what participants actually do (which I am in favor of). Besides, if you haven't
encourage more people to operate even 24 hours. If more people feel they have a shot at winning the 24 hour category or being in the top ten, and they can do so without killing themselves, then perh
N2IC wrote: In the 24 hour RDXC, 9% operate full time (>23 hours). In the 48 hour CQWW SSB (using KR2Q data), 11.9% operate 24 hours or more. So, presented with a shorter contest, the percentage who
So RDXC and CQWW are on the same level? Apparently we can now draw definite conclusions by comparing one of the best "attended" with a contest that many people have never heard of. Amazing. Mike W0MU
Personally, I am not opposed to "adding another category" if doing so adds to the enjoyment of all. However, it is the sponsors who shoulder the burden of doing so. I share K5GO's argument that it sh
I am one person who might operate more if there was a 24 hour category. Right now I only operate Sprint, NAQP, IARU, and SS because those I can fit in my schedule. I would suggest that anyone operati
Myself still would love to see someone sponsor, run, manage, whatever, a test, where the contest duration is still the full 48 hours. but you can only operate a max 24 hours. I just would love to see
That I do not like tho! Take the "Best" is defeating the purpose of the shorter 24 hours idea. If it is the best it forces the station to again operate the full 48 because who knows the conditions ma
Mike, what is amazing is that 3455 logs have been received for the 2013 RDXC, held just a few weeks ago. If you haven't heard of it, you have been following in the footsteps of Rip Van Winkle. 73, St
Just how many catagories do we want? There are too many now. Lets make it a Low Band /High band entry-- 160,80,40, (Lowband)....then let's make that assisted, non assisted, then lets make that LP/HP,
The premise was if there was a 24 hour category would more people attempt to operate the entire 24 hours instead of 10, 12, 20, etc. I don't think we will ever know until it tried or really tracked.
I have been arguing here for a 24 hour category, but I am also strongly opposed to "best 24 out of 48" instead of simply 24 hours max. "Best 24 out of 48" defeats the entire intent ... it takes away
A straight 24 hour contest is a short iron butt contest that discriminates against older and health constrained contestants as well as those who live in the northern and southern latitudes. Letting t
Why not have 2, twenty-four hour periods.... you can chose which one to enter, first 24 or second 24. I wonder if this might give people a reason to be working hard for all of the slow period on Sund
Author: Maarten van Rossum <pd2r.maarten@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2013 10:55:20 +0200
Best 24 out of 48 should work just fine. In a 48 hour period you always have slow hours. It doesn't make sense to keep operating in those low hours. And even if someone decided to operate 48 out the
I agree -- we have to try it to find out. While I agree that the top guns and big guns will likely win if they enter a 24-hour category, there may well be some very talented operators who will give t