Stan,
As always, you have a logical and down to earth approach on most subjects -
this one no exception.
I also think the challenge is somewhere else than trying to shift
contesting into something it really isn't... We need to with persistence
focus on keeping the hobby itself, and contesting in particular alive.
We also need to both be mentors by welcoming younger hams to our bigger
stations, but also put a lot of emphasis on creating activites centered
aound youth activity within the existing contests. That could be new
categories, heavy focus on youth participation in WRTC with not just one or
two youth teams for the bad conscience...
In the framework of WRTC could be a Junior event with slightly less need
for logisitics to accommodate maybe 10-15 teams with a more field day type
of equipment (say 100 W or even 10 W solar/battry powered QRP with a
multiband vertical antenna). That could be a WRTC within WRTC to make PR
for youth contesting that does not require huge money and equipment to
qualify.
Contesting on WRTC level is of course very competitive, but we shall not
forget that our younger ham population normally lack both necessary skills
and money to qualify for such event. Why exclude them from the activity
just because of that fact?
73 de Mats RM2D (SM6LRR)
2016-03-27 16:10 GMT+03:00 Stan Stockton <wa5rtg@gmail.com>:
> A few thoughts....
>
> I don't think we need to give up on contesting or amateur radio because of
> setting our sights too high. We don't need to compete with video gaming
> when at any given time there may be 25 million people playing those games.
> We barely have the bandwidth to accommodate those few thousand who
> currently operate in a big contest.
>
> We do have a problem when the average age of the US ham is 68 years...
>
> The infrastructure required for amateur radio is daunting as compared to
> other activities. My opinion is that focus should be on generating enough
> interest that high school club stations become more prevalent. How much
> focus is given to golf or tennis or other, not for profit sports where
> there are a half dozen participants?
>
> We have a lot of ham radio operators, 800,000 give or take a hundred
> thousand - about 8-10 times as many as when I was a kid. However the
> percentage of those who have EVER made a contact on an HF band is probably
> 1/10th the percentage of those who regularly operated the HF bands years
> ago. Most have never been exposed and were mentored by others whose only
> activity is talking through a repeater.
>
> It's water under the bridge, but my opinion is that while the elimination
> of morse code and the VE program DRAMATICALLY increased the population of
> those with a call sign, it hasn't helped increase the number of hams who
> regularly operate the HF bands as compared to 45 years ago.
>
> In my opinion we need a few thousand new contesters worldwide with an
> average age of about 25 years old for contesting to be good for many
> decades to come. We don't need to significantly change the sport to
> something that only resembles ham radio in an attempt to compete with video
> games.
>
> How difficult would it be for each of you as an individual to generate
> interest in one or more youngsters, teach them morse code (if you will),
> get them on HF, interest them in contesting and help them along the way?
>
> Little incentive.....If you don't leave your radio stuff to your
> grandchildren your wife is going to sell it to the first person who will
> haul it off :-)
>
> 73... Stan, K5GO
>
>
>
> > On Mar 27, 2016, at 1:37 AM, David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > You're entire reply essentially says that I'm talking apples and
> oranges. And you're exactly right. But those apples compete for attention
> with our oranges among youngsters, and the apples are going to win because
> of the reasons I laid out.
> >
> > And it is exactly that radiosport is going to have to change if it
> intends to survive. Again I point to the demographics that clearly prove
> my point. Deny it if you want, but that's just more evidence of what's
> wrong.
> >
> > 73,
> > Dave AB7E
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> On 3/25/2016 1:46 PM, Paul O'Kane wrote:
> >>> On 23/03/2016 21:01, David Gilbert wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I enjoy contesting, but it's a legacy that isn't going to successfully
> compete for attention among anything beyond a very small percentage of
> today's youth. Most of the young ops at Field Day or contest stations are
> only there because of some family connection, and most of those don't
> last. Even the great majority of new hams the ARRL likes to tout as
> evidence of a growing base don't stick with the hobby ... if they did, we
> wouldn't be having these discussions. I do think that contesting is
> drawing a growing percentage of hams, but the base is getting old fast, and
> from my perspective here are some of the reasons:
> >>
> >> David is right, but also wrong - especially when he compares
> >> ham radio to the internet - that's an apples and oranges
> >> comparison.
> >>
> >>> 1. Ham radio is expensive, especially of you actually want to be
> competitive instead of just participating. Rigs and antennas cost far more
> than a decent computer or smart phone, both of which offer far more
> effective communication and opportunities for competition.
> >>
> >> "Expensive" applies to all competitive activities when you
> >> want to be competitive - to include time and money spent
> >> on diets, training, equipment, travelling and expenses.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> 2. Ham radio requires antennas. Theey are physically obtrusive and
> often create conflict with neighbors. Hardly anybody has to fight to get
> connected to the internet.
> >>
> >> Apples and oranges.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> 3. Ham radio is real time and unreliable, subject to the vagaries of
> propagation and activity on the other end.
> >>
> >> That's precisely what attracts us, and what distinguishes
> >> amateur radio from most other forms of communication.
> >>
> >>
> >> Why do some people still compete in sailboat racing,
> >> subject to the vagaries of wind, waves, tides and
> >> currents? Because it's hard and they enjoy it - it's
> >> what gives the activity its name, sailboat racing.
> >>
> >>> Applications like Twitter, Facebook, and online forums (like this
> one) are precise, dependable, and "sticky" (you can read and answer at your
> convenience). Online game competition against real opponents from around
> the world is available around the clock every day with virtually no waiting.
> >>
> >> All hosted on the internet, a public worldwide communications
> >> utility and, for all intents and purposes, free.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> 4. Ham radio requires a license, one which many of us perceive as
> relatively easy to get but which isn't needed at all for any other
> pursuit. It's a roadblock with no particular advantage to the user ...
> it's not like it keeps LIDs off the air.
> >>
> >> Licences are required for many competitive pursuits,
> >> including some motor sports (on land, sea and air), and
> >> competition licences are required for some athletics
> >> events.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> 5. Almost any video game out there is more immediate with more
> intense real time competition than ham radio contesting has.
> >>
> >> Apples and oranges - powerboat racing can be a lot more
> >> immediate and intense than sailboat racing.
> >>
> >>> I honestly hope that radiosport hangs around for a while ...
> >>
> >> > I do too - it's fun for me and I have a lot of money invested in it.
> But it needs to change if it's actually going to draw new people to the
> game.
> >>
> >> Does sailboat racing have to change? If not, why not?
> >>
> >>
> >> > I've tried to come up with the idea of a contest format that would
> capture some of the real time features of a video game, particularly the
> ability to directly and immediately counter (either by action or by score)
> the actions of another contester,
> >>
> >> Don't golfers (other than in matchplay) compete in
> >> isolation? The all have access to real-time scoreboards,
> >> and we could have them too, although some contesters
> >> prefer others not to let others know how they're doing.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Ham radio simply doesn't have the fascination for anybody today that
> it did for us ... and if we were young again in today's world it wouldn't
> for us either.
> >>
> >> Why then, some two hundred years after the introduction
> >> of mechanical propulsion, do some people insist on
> >> racing without it? The answer is they do it for its
> >> own sake.
> >>
> >>> If we want to change the demographics of our hobby, our hobby is
> going to have to change. It's as simple as that.
> >>
> >> Sure - change is good so long as our hobby, amateur radio,
> >> doesn't change into another hobby.
> >>
> >> 73,
> >> Paul EI5DI
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> CQ-Contest mailing list
> >> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> >> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|