K2AXX makes some very rational points here.
The whole purpose of the VHF contests is to encourage pushing the frontiers
in station design and operating. You can bet that the guy who has a good
signal on the microwave bands also has a powerhouse station on six and two
and will be using it to best advantage in the contest. Many of these guys
will be doing something else if the contest is limited to the low bands, and
participation will fall, not rise. The scoring structure was wisely
designed to encourage higher band participation and thereby increase band
usage in a region threatened by commercial interests.
>From a practical point of view, a special contest for 6 meters or for 6 and
2 meters is not likely to be a big success. Witness participation in the CQ
VHF contest, limited to 6 and 2 and with time of year chosen for the maximum
sporadic E activity. The CQ VHF contest even has the advantage of having
full results printed in a major magazine, something the ARRL has unwisely
chosen not to do. Still, it has nothing like the activity of the ARRL
contests. There just isn't enough going on on two bands to hold interest
for the full time. All another contest like this would do is siphon
activity by the less-equipped stations away from the major contests, further
reducing participation.
IF there really is a desire to create new categories to make it possible for
the plug and play gang to win in their category, then create categories for
them to let them have their special niche in the contest. But don't reduce
the incentives for those willing to put their time into station design to
utilize the microwaves.
I remember when I first started operating in VHF contests
("mountain-topping" as we called it in those days, the rover category hadn't
been invented yet). I used low power and portable antennas and had a great
time. I never thought twice about the guy who had more power and more bands
having an advantage. I knew I could build up my station like his if that
was where my priorities were - the same rules applied to everybody. I
appreciated those high power guys out there to give me more and longer
distance QSOs. Now the tables are reversed and a lot of my time in the
contests is spent giving contacts to guys with low power and small antennas
on six and two.
My advice for what it's worth: It ain't broke so don't fix it.
73,
Jim
W4RX
FM19bb
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hoffman, Mark" <mhoffman@microwavedata.com>
To: <vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Cc: <n2jmh@arrl.net>; <k2dh@frontiernet.net>; <n1nd@arrl.org>
Sent: Monday, April 07, 2003 5:16 PM
Subject: [VHFcontesting] re: W3ZZ's QST Contesting Article
> 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
#################################################################
#################################################################
#################################################################
#####
#####
#####
#################################################################
#################################################################
#################################################################
|