CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Clarification from DL1MGB

To: "cq-contest@contesting.com" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Clarification from DL1MGB
From: Michael Adams <mda@n1en.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 23:51:42 +0000
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
I realize that the change is described as "final", but I'll offer a thought 
(since I've managed to be quiet so far).

First, it should be noted that I'm probably not going to be in the running for 
a WRTC seat.  Accordingly, I don't feel personally affected by the selection 
rules.  I'll play in contests as my schedule permits, picking classes based on 
my interests (and rules), without WRTC qualification influencing my decisions.  
These comments are made as someone enjoying the prospect of watching the 
qualification race.

While I mostly agree with the notion that Unassisted and Assisted are 
sufficiently different that they shouldn't be combined for competition purposes 
(although I still wonder how much of a difference it makes among the best of 
the best), one of the most intriguing things about the qualification rules as 
originally proposed  was that they sort of removed the stigma associated with 
assistance.

Giving assisted scores 0.9 weight undoes that.

I can see that there is some sense to the idea that because WRTC teams play 
unassisted, unassisted operating should be emphasized in qualification, there 
are other elements of WRTC that don't translate to the qualifying events:  
they're M/2 stations, they will probably be using special pileup-generating 
callsigns, etc.

The teams that are most successful at WRTC will be those that can work the most 
stations with the most accuracy... and I'm not sure that assisted/unassisted 
status really matters.

If there is still any possibility of reconsideration, please think about 
revising the rules such that:
+ assisted scores get 1.0 weight; but
+ assisted entrants are compared against the highest single operator (assisted 
or not) score

If the committee feels a need to nudge potential WRTC entrants to demonstrate 
their skills unassisted, it might be better to simply limit the number of 
assisted scores that can be used for qualification ... or to require that WRTC 
candidates submit some minimum number of single op low power unassisted scores 
as part of their application, as they are the closest analogues to WRTC 
conditions, assuming the committee continues with the "field day style" WRTC.

Adopting one or both of those changes would also open the door to some 
fascinating strategy decisions for us mere mortals to observe from the 
sidelines.

73

-- 
Michael Adams | N1EN | mda@n1en.org
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>