Excellent! I was thinking about the contest within a contest concept
myself. If NCJ isn't interested in taking it on, perhaps one of the large
contest clubs would be interested.
One thing. Item 5 might need more definition. An hour might need to be
defined. For example, can I pick the sixty individual minutes where I had
three Q's per minute even though they are not contiguous? As you can see, I
could create a 180 Q/hr result even if I never got above 120.
I love the whole idea of a contest within a contest. Where do I sign up to
sponsor a new plaque?!
--Dennis, NE6I
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Neiger" <n6tj@sbcglobal.net>
To: "CQ-Contest@contesting. com" <CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2007 10:40 AM
Subject: [CQ-Contest] WHAT IF
> Why we're all in the formative stages of What Ifing from Randy's excellent
> notions, may I add a couple additional ideas? Thank you.
>
> (1) Our ARRL National Contest Journal take on the sponsorship of these
> Contests Within A Contest.
>
> Comment: The NCJ is frequently soliciting input to fill the
> pages.
> Contest results a couple time a year, what's wrong with
> publishing a few pages of interesting contest
> results too?? The NCJ already has national circulation (duh) and
> perhaps this would add to its international
> flavor. The CQ Contest Magazine that K3EST engineered until its
> premature demise was excellent, and perhaps with
> some infusion of enthusiasm, help, sponsorship, and
> awards - the NCJ can become more than it is
> today.
>
> Comment: An NCJ Contest Committee be formed to administer the
> Parallel Contests. (We should have no difficulty
> attracting enough 'volunteers' to add this
> Prestige to their contesting resume's.)
>
> (2) Initially, at least, these Parallel Contests be restricted to the
> four
> 48 hour behemoth's: CQ WW DX and ARRL DX. (The other MAJOR - CQ WPX -
> already allows one to operate less than 48 hours, and compete).
>
> (3) The Parallel categories are restricted to Single Operator. Do we
> still
> have UNASSISTED and ASSISTED classes? One thought would be to just have
> it
> ASSISTED. Anyone can use packet, or not, but you're all in the same
> category - so do whatever works best for you?
>
> (4) 12-hours or 24-hours???? Maybe both. If the sponsor can manage 24
> hours, probably it can manage 12 hours, too.
>
> (5) Each competitor submits his entire log for adjudication. He can be
> in
> the 12 hour category or 24 hour category, but NOT both. In his submittal,
> the competitor identifies the 12 hours (clock hour) OR 24 hours that he is
> submitting. Thus he can operate as much of the 48 hours of the contest
> that
> he wants, and when it's over he picks his best 12 or 24. The 12 or 24 do
> not have to be consecutive.
>
> COMMENT: Obviously for this to really work and minimize log checking
> grief, there should be a presumption of playing
> fair and with total integrity. The log
> checkers and committee will more than have their hands full, and will
> certainly hope for this, and for it having any
> chance of working.
>
> (6) Categories be established similar, but not exactly, to the existing
> ARRL DX and CQ WW DX today. That is, highs in ARRL by country for DX and
> State or Province for W/VE. For CQ WW, highs for country and for W/VE
> call
> area ( i.e., W1, W2, VE4, etc).
>
> (7) Perhaps the existing ARRL DX and CQ WW DX committees will participate
> in
> this undertaking by merely providing their respective UBN analyses to the
> NCJ Committee as an aid its adjudication efforts? Thanks in advance.
>
> (8) And finally, we set a goal of CQ WW DX this fall to give this a try??
> What do we have to lose??
>
> Vy 73
>
> Jim Neiger N6TJ
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|