Pete
A terrific idea, but probably doomed to fail from the start. I'm not sure
what the "my sandbox" syndrome is ( common language??), but perhaps this is
the same as N.I.H, being not invented here?
In reality there is a number of first class contests which run for 24Hours
( Russian DX) or 36 of 48( WAE), both of which publish results in under 6
months, and supply results f.o.c. to entrants. Even under the aegis of CQ,
there is WPX, which is 36/48. CQWW was the first major contest, and clearly
is the most popular by a margin, but is it the best? In my personal opinion,
definitely not.
So the remedy is clear, vote with your paddles, microphones and keyboards,
and acknowledge that commercial magazine publishers will probably never
change.
73
Clive
GW3NJW
Several years ago, two other guys and I publicly proposed a test of a
"24-Hour Contest Challenge". The idea was to allow entrants to one of the
big DX contests, if they wished, also to submit scores and operating periods
for a 24-hour award to be managed completely separately from the "parent"
contest. We did some research that suggested the net impact would be
positive - many less-than-full-time ops would put in more time on the air in
order to compete for it. We had also gone fairly far in figuring out the
logistics so that there would be no effect on the contest sponsors and log
checkers.
Then I went to Dayton and talked to the contest sponsor (no, I'm not going
to name names). I was astonished by the fierce hostile reaction. I thought
that was just the "my sandbox" syndrome, but in the weeks thereafter, I was
also surprised by the negative comments from contesters I respect. I still
didn't (and don't) understand why, but the bottom line was that I decided to
drop out, and it never happened.
Maybe, with our community being (on average) a couple of years older and
wiser, it's time to revive the concept. Anyone who does it has to be
prepared to take a lot of flak, though.
73, Pete N4ZR
At 06:06 AM 11/18/2005, sawyered@earthlink.net wrote:
>Thanks Gerry. I understand your point of view and respect it.
>
>It would seem that 3830 is somewhat addressing your interest in comparing
"apples to apples" from a time standpoint.
>
>I remember Ward Silver had some dialog going a while back about the
"contest within a contest" approach. He has attempted to do this with IARU
for M/S Low Power. Since we are all just happy enough to have gotten the CQ
WW certs we have recently, it would seem that adding more to that is
unlikely. However, maybe one of the contest clubs would be successful in
more fully implementing N0AX's approach and more fully institutionalize this
type of approach.
>
>73 and see you in the 'tests.
>
>Ed N1UR
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: "Gerry Treas, K8GT" <k8gt@twmi.rr.com>
>Sent: Nov 17, 2005 8:39 PM
>To: sawyered@earthlink.net
>Cc: cq-contest@contesting.com
>Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Competitor Friendly Contesting
>
>I respect Ed and Kirk's contesting skills and acumen highly. I also
>think they are really nice guys, too! But I strongly disagree with
>their analogies and conclusions. In a marathon, or race of any kind you
>do not need anyone else, except to provide the sponsor with enough
>bodies to provide interest, but in a radio contest you "Top Ten - Top
>Guns" need all of us "also-rans" and casual contesters, and you need to
>generate interest among us so that we participate to help raise your
>score.. That score would be rather measly if all of us weren't in the
>"mix". I came to contesting rather late (the last 15 years) and I have
>a hard time now staying awake at night, at 60 + years. I have only had
>modest stations and I like to contest from home, the bathroom breaks are
>all too frequent to do justice at a Multi-Op. I have done a few stints
>at K8CC, thanks Dave, and 2 CQWW CW's at PJ2T, and had a ball. But now,
>I really would like to be able to compare my results with others of my
>limited abilities and resources. You need us "cannon fodder", so how
>about throwing us a bone? A chance for a certificate for our 24 hour or
>whatever limited. It's not like we'd ever try to say that we "won the
>contest" if we received one. I'm beyond ever being able to go the full
>48, do you want me to just forget about it and go do something else?
>
>73, Gerry K8GT Still tryin', but not bloody likely to get anywhere.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>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
|