[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] WRTC Qualifying & RDXC

To: JIM NEIGER <n6tj@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WRTC Qualifying & RDXC
From: Stan Stockton <wa5rtg@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 21:31:59 -0600
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>

I read what you wrote several times.  

Guessing there will be another similar posting within a decade when someone 
will yearn for the good ole days when you could click on an Internet spot and 
press F4 to call a new multiplier instead of having a fully automated robot 
work the contest for you. 

Sadly, what you wrote will not reverse what is destined to happen.  However, 
the mention of those call signs brought back a lot of memories, and what you 
wrote is without any doubt in my mind deserving of a standing ovation.

73...Stan, K5GO

Sent from my iPad

> On Dec 11, 2014, at 2:41 PM, JIM NEIGER <n6tj@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> As I approach my 76th birthday and in my 61st year of ham radio and 
> contesting - I often reflect on what has made my life, and ham radio in 
> general and contesting in particular,  meaningful, interesting, 
> disappointing, profound, and fun.  And over the course of these personal 
> reflections - I've acquired a list of what I call the Axioms of Life.  Some 
> are useful;  some are outright banal and trite.  But one I've observed to be 
> true more often than not:
>                                            The Top Never Pulls the Bottom Up;
>                                            The Bottom Always Drags the Top 
> Down
> Like Charly and others opine - the essence of ham radio contesting has 
> morphed into another hobby in which the Internet appears to be the center 
> hub.  For those who use it, love it, couldn't/wouldn't live or operate 
> without it:  enjoy.
> Many words and opinions have been conveyed here, so no sense repeating the 
> obvious.  Many defenses to what I might loosely label Internet/Radio 
> Contesting rationalize that it's an advancement of technology, and if you use 
> a memory keyer, or a computer, or didn't build your radio yourself, you then 
> must also sign up to all advancements in technology.  Or not.
> Some like to learn and operate the code; some do not.  Some take pride in 
> finding their own DX; some obviously couldn't care less.  The score, the ease 
> of moving it upwards is all that appears to matter.  And that's OK.  I guess.
> But to rationalize it to be SERIOUS radio contesting really does, I believe, 
> a dis-service to the traditions and memories and the legacies of our friends 
> and great contesting operators of the past, that REALLY made our hobby what 
> it is.  Or was....    Gentlemen that I idolized, and later was privileged to 
> know,  when I started in 1954 - like W6AM, KH6IJ, W4KFC, ZD8J,  W9IOP.   Too 
> many, of today's stalwart Internet Operators didn't have the privilege to 
> listen to Vic Clark run Sweepstakes on CW.  Or Nosey KH6IJ telling us on SSB: 
> "I know MY call; I want to know yours"  Or W6AM busting the pileups with his 
> rhombics.  Or ZD8J winning CQ WW CW in back to back years with a BUG !!
> Operator SKILL used to be what mattered most in contesting.  Today, it 
> appears to be something else.  And I think those who want to declare 
> themselves some kind of "winners" through their Internet prowess have really 
> missed the boat.  But everyone today appears to be entrenched in their way, 
> and no one is going to change any minds about anything.
> I just did 48 hours straight in WW SSB and 46 of 48 in  WW CW.   Did I win 
> the world?  Nope.  Did I qualify for the next WRTC?  Doubtful.  Did I use the 
> Internet?  Nope.  And it was fun.
> And in my heart of hearts, I like to think my friends above: Don, Nosey, Vic, 
> John, and Larry would've been proud.
> Vy 73,
> Jim Neiger  N6TJ
> -----Original Message----- From: Charles Harpole
> Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 4:15 PM
> To: w2lc@twcny.rr.com
> Cc: CQ-Contest Reflector
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WRTC Qualifying & RDXC
> Yes W2LC, the movement to station automation lately is the evolution of
> real ham radio into another hobby, related but different.  When some hams
> lost the joy of discovery and happenstance...the essence of ham radio...
> they turned the corner into another hobby which unfortunately intrudes on
> the essence and destroys it by intermixing the two.
> Of course, we few can still practice real ham radio and try to cope with
> the new hobby tuning in, but it is still a sad happening to see a real
> human joy slowly disappear.  Bye bye, Charly
>> On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 1:19 AM, <w2lc@twcny.rr.com> wrote:
>> I don't operate assisted. Why? I'm not interested in RBN, skimmer,
>> internet spots, etc. Those are cute technologies but of no interest to me.
>> I do single-op, mostly one radio, and I balance running with S&P. That's
>> why I dislike the non-IDers, I actually S&P.
>> For WRTC NA2 you must join several multi's if you wish to place near the
>> top of the standings. Strictly going single-op won't get you there without
>> a Herculean effort.
>> And if I did go assisted what would I get?
>> An internet connection that is unreliable and fails on a daily basis.
>> Those of you in EU (and you too Randy, and I'm sorry for picking on you,
>> well ... a little bit), please understand that there are many areas of the
>> US that do not have reliable internet. I am in one of those locations, and
>> I am not that far out into the countryside. FIOS? yep they have called me,
>> but when they hear where I am, in relation to their service, they say
>> "never mind".
>> I probably will not have truely reliable internet at home in my lifetime.
>> Why? Not enough customers in my area to make it economically profitable
>> for
>> the internet provider. I am the next to last house on the cable. I'm not
>> sure what the next house does. No big deal, that is just the way it is. I
>> don't use spots anyway. And the only reason TW ran the cable this far out
>> (for a relatively small number of customers) is because one of the town
>> board members lives next door, otherwise I guess would have to use my cell
>> phone. Ooops my cell service is marginal too, scratch that, but ok for my
>> limited use.
>> The plus side for my locaton is the noise level, I am fortunate to have a
>> nearly zero noise level. I would rather have that, than better internet
>> service any day.
>> As for RDXC, I am disqualified even before the start: (kind of, I
>> exaggerate)
>> 11.11 Logs for high scores claiming to be in the top 3 list of any contest
>> category (p 3, 3.3) must indicate the frequency of every QSO made (CAT
>> system use) with a minimum resolution of 1 kHz.
>> 11.11.1 An applicant will not be awarded any of the final "Top 3" places
>> of any category unless exact frequency of every QSO made is indicated.
>> So I cannot use RDXC for WRTC qualifying at least not if I place well,
>> I'll be DQ'ed for not having exact frequencies in my log ("will not be
>> awarded" = "DQ", right?). Didn't someone say that not having exact
>> frequencies makes you a cheater? No it doesn't.
>> I use analog radios, remember those? And they don't have a CAT interface
>> so I cannot comply with the frequency rule, unless I manually record
>> frequencies. Not gonna do that. I like the radios I am using, they work
>> very well. No lectures on older radios please.
>> Therefore a question for the RDXC contest committee, why would I operate
>> your contest when, if I place in the top 3, I will be DQ'ed? Not awarded
>> or
>> whatever
>> I figure to get into the 21st century I need to spend aboout $50,000 USD.
>> 2 new radios, 2 new power amplifiers (a couple of those EU 3500W units
>> ought to do it, I'll run them conservatively), another tower or two,
>> mono-banders, and a house in the Hamptons. A lot of money for maybe a few
>> hundred more QSO's.
>> Maybe, just maybe 2015 will bring a new radio, but which one? I've heard
>> so many bad comments on all of the major radio brands, it is difficult to
>> choose.
>> 73 Scott W2LC
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> -- 
> Charly, HS0ZCW
> _______________________________________________
> 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

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