VHFcontesting
[Top] [All Lists]

[VHFcontesting] re. W3ZZ's QST contesting article, Rovers, ect.

To: <vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Subject: [VHFcontesting] re. W3ZZ's QST contesting article, Rovers, ect.
From: AA4ZZ@aol.com (AA4ZZ@aol.com)
Date: Thu Jun 19 16:44:41 2003
In a message dated 4/8/03 1:27:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time, geoiii@kkn.net 
writes:
>  
>  That might be true - in my quick glance at the numbers 
>  it would apper that the biggest gains were in the 1992-1995
>  time period for all three contests. 
>  
>  I wonder why?

The First contest with Rovers was June 1992
The Last contest with the old Rover Scoring was January 1996

The answer seems rather obvious.

When the Rover Catagory was introduced it sparked tremendous new activity all 
over the country.The additional Rovers then generated more activity from 
fixed stations because there were many more contacts to work.

The Rover scoring change was made to eliminate grid circling; despite 
predictions it would reduce activity. The reduction in activity indeed did 
happen. Grid circling, although not as productive, still occurs. The fix did 
not work.

The original scoring weighted grids over contacts generating real interest in 
Roving outside the northeast. The new scoring weights contacts over grid 
squares favoring the northeast and making roving much less productive in the 
remainder of the country. Less Rovers mean less contacts for fixed stations 
to work and make them less likely to make a serious effort in the contest. 
Less serious contest entrants leads to less logs submitted as we have seen.

At the time of the grid circling issue I proposed a simple fix that did not 
change the grid/contact weighting: the addition of a "Backtrack Prohibition." 
 Specifically: "once a Rover has left a grid it activated  and made contacts 
from another grid ; it may not go back and make contacts from the previous 
grid." This propoosal effectivly eliminates grid circling. 

A change to the original Rover scoring with a "Backtrack Prohibition" would 
help to get activity growing again.

Yet if we could get the FT100/FT817/IC706 crowd into VHF contesting we can 
have a growth rate much greater than that of the early 90's. How do we do 
this? We need to have seperate VHF(50,144,222,432) and All Band subdivisions 
of each entry catagory. 

THe VHF Rover, VHF SOLP and VHF QRP portable  catagories would be very 
attractive to the FT100/FT817/IC706 crowd. They could be immediately 
competive in many areas of the country.The  addition of a 222 FM rig or 
transverter is an easy upgrade that gets them on all 4 bands. With good club 
level promotion by us (the current vhf contesters) and additional promotion 
by the ARRL in QST ( articles about cheap and simple antennas, and how fun it 
is to be aRover for example) we stand to gain many new vhf contesters. And 
who knows they try it the might get very active on vhf outside the contests.

Fr those who like the current format it's still there in the All Band 
catagories. The largest scores and largest club scores will still be produced 
by those with more bands. And as we generate more active vhfers we will 
generate more folks who may develop an interest in the microwaves. After all 
not many microwavers come straight from the HF ranks.

In summary I have two propsals:

1. Return to the original Rover scoring with the addition of a "Backtrack 
Prohibition."

2. Have VHF(50,144,222,432)  and All Band subdivisions of each current 
catagory.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [VHFcontesting] re. W3ZZ's QST contesting article, Rovers, ect., AA4ZZ@aol.com <=