W2UP wrote:
> Do all contests need to be the same?
Absolutely not! But all contests need to be fun for a majority (I could say
most) of the participants. Otherwise, why are we operating in them? Because
that's what we've always done? I hope not.
If contests are fun, participation will increase (and to some extent,
vice-versa).
If a significant number of people are complaining that a contest is boring
or unattractive, we need to pay attention and do something about it. The old
mantra, "If it ain't broke don't fix it", assumes that 1) everyone else
feels the same way, and 2) it's not possible to make improvements to good
(but not great) contests. I think that's a rather narrow view.
It would be silly to simply copy what other successful contests do. There's
no creativity in that. Sure, we could make ARRL DX more interesting by
adding double mults for IARU zones and letting DX work each other without
restriction, but then it wouldn't be ARRL DX (i.e., the real North American
QSO Party.) But those aren't the only things we could do. Rather than
copying, we should look for improvements that fit well with the fundamental
nature of the contest.
There have been a number of worthy suggestions, like going back to high/low
categories instead of single-band, a 24-hour limit category, and using ARRL
Sections instead of State/Province to give DX more mults to work. These
changes would have little or no impact on the nature of the contest but
could make it more fun for a larger number of people. It's a shame that none
of these ideas has made it past the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" crowd.
Don't like these ideas? Fine. If we take off the blinders, even more good
ideas might emerge. One thing we'd better look at long and hard is whether
our contests appeal to young people in the USA. If not, Radio Sport in this
country will eventually go the way of the horse and buggy.
I'm all for maintaining tradition, but the best way to make sure that
contesting and ham radio die is to hang on to the past until it is pried
from our cold dead hands.
73, Dick WC1M
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Barry [mailto:w2up@comcast.net]
> Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 9:22 AM
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL is not my favourite
>
> Do all contests need to be the same? Variety is the spice of life.
>
> There are drawbacks in every contest. For example, how dumb is it to
> work a Zero point QSO to get a mult (and not be certain that you're
> going to be logged, cuz the other station doesn't like his time wasted)?
>
> Barry W2UP
>
> On 3/7/2013 05:10, Doug Turnbull wrote:
> > Gentlemen,
> >
> > The ARRL contest has some drawbacks for those outside the USA.
> You
> > can only work USA and Canada and I do this happily as I am originally
> > from W land but there are long periods when propagation is not great
> so the Q rates
> > are not high and the contest less interesting. I would suggest that
> the
> > fact that DX has to work the USA means that many DX stations give the
> > ARRL DX contest a miss.
> >
> > This is the nature of the contest. Sweepstakes is strictly
> a North
> > American contest yet remain popular. The French REF contest allows
> DX
> > stations to participate but the scoring system discourages such
> operators.
> > I suppose the ARRL DX contest is just different as all contests are.
> For
> > me the CQ WW contests are number one followed closely by CQ WPX
> Contests.
> > For Top Band the CQ Stew Perry and CQ WW 160M contests are excellent.
> The
> > ARRL does a great job with its 10M and 160M contests.
> >
> >
> >
> > I am a pretty happy camper and just accept that there are
> differences
> > between contests. For a low power station in the USA or Canada, I
> would
> > imagine it is fun to have the rest of the world begging for a QSO.
> As
> > for VE5, you may be isolated but you are very much wanted. Of
> course
> > location affects the scores and so score comparisons are difficult.
> >
> >
> >
> > 73 Doug EI2CN
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
|