CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Flashback - Is It Time?

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Flashback - Is It Time?
From: David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2013 10:31:46 -0700
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>

Actually, that was a total typo error, and for that I apologize. It should have read "it makes far more sense to limit operation (for the 24 hour category) to a maximum of 24 hours but let participants chose which 24 hours those may be." That's consistent with my other recent posts where I've strongly disagreed with letting participants cherry pick their best 24 hours out of a longer operation.

But I also got a private reply from Jack, K3FIV where he clarified his recent proposal, and I think his suggestion makes the most sense of all. In a nutshell:

1.  The contest remains at 48 hours, and of course the 48 categories remain.
2.  Two new 24 hour categories are added for SOAB and SOAB(A).
3. EVERY contestant can operate as many hours as he likes ... whichever hours he likes ... but only contacts made during the first 24 hours of operation (not the first 24 hours of the contest) count for the new 24 hour categories. 4. For the 24 hour entries, any contacts made after the first 24 hours of operation still get submitted but count as checklog 5. Off times for the 24 hour category must be at least 30 minutes or 60 minutes or whatever ... I'm not picky on that point, although I think 30 minutes would be consistent with other contests. 6. Any participant would still have to declare which category they were entering at the time of log submission.

Under that scheme, anybody who is able to work longer than 24 hours is allowed to do so and provide contacts for everyone else, but they aren't allowed to cherry pick their best 24 hours after the fact. Anybody who wants to shoot for the normal 48 hour categories can still do so, but if unexpected circumstances arise that cut their operation short they have a second entry option.

So I'm honestly curious ... if the contest sponsors were willing to incorporate these two new categories into their log checking workload, what's the downside for anyone else individually or for the contest in general?? I don't see that there is one, and I certainly haven't heard a rational explanation of one yet. It's not even difficult for an individual to parse their own log at 24 hours elapsed operation to see what their 24 hour score would be if they operated more than 24 hours.

73,
Dave   AB7E



On 4/3/2013 7:20 PM, Richard F DiDonna NN3W wrote:
Oh really? I thought the idea of a reduced hours category was that folks cannot handle doing 48 hours and that 24 hours was the alternative. So now, its operate up to 48 hours and turn in your best 24? Good to see the moving goalposts are in effect.

73 Rich NN3W


On 4/3/2013 9:28 PM, David Gilbert wrote:

I strongly disagree. The whole idea of a 24 hour category is to offer an option for participants to match their physical ability and sleep cycles to propagation and band activity. Forcing anyone to operate 24 hours straight doesn't accomplish that in the least. If we ever have a 24 hour category, it makes far more sense to limit operation to a maximum of 48 hours but let participants choose which 24 hours those may be. Require that all off periods be at least 30 minutes and be done with it.

Nobody gains anything by requiring that the 24 hours be contiguous, and certainly not the folks who prefer to tough it out for the full 48 hours.

Dave  AB7E



On 4/3/2013 1:28 PM, Steve London wrote:
Just let the operator choose any starting time. From that point, they can operate for the next 24 hours, should they decide to be even do that much.

73,
Steve, N2IC

On 04/03/2013 10:32 AM, Richard F DiDonna NN3W wrote:
Picking best 24 hours is pretty absurd IMHO. I'll just run the
statistical analysis of one hour chunks - or even one minute chunks - to
see which gives the best QSO and point ratio. i can guarantee you that
the big stations will win this one.

Make it 24 hours straight and be done with it (not that I agree with any
24 hour window at all). Of course, someone in the world is going to
complain that a particular start time is prejudicial for some reason.

73 Rich NN3W

On 4/3/2013 10:38 AM, Edward Sawyer wrote:
I can support this effort. Doesn't burden the sponsors yet and we see who
actually bellies up. I certainly hope that ALL of the vocal people on
this
reflector operated the CQ WW/ARRL DX both modes to show their
dedication and
commitment to operating and competing as much as rendering opinion.


I think that 30 min off times and 6 stages is too generous. Are we
competing or just accommodating convenience? Need to decide which it is.


I think that N4OGW's suggestion of "the best 24" as long as you
operate at
least 24 will be very demoralizing for this group. The best 24 f the 40+
crowd is likely as good or better than the best 24 for the 24 crowd.
If you
think any of us are sleeping or eating during that 24.you really are not
paying attention.


Ed N1UR

_______________________________________________
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


_______________________________________________
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

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>