I think that is how the vast majority look at it. There are a group of
international competitors ...D4C, CR3L, 4O3A to pull a few out of their hat.
The rest of us are either competing within our zone or country, or ..against
ourselves. That is why ..I understand why it this type of thing is so
important to the guys at PJ2T et al ...while for most of us ...it doesn't
really change anything. I find it hard to have an informed opinion about
competition at that level, because I haven't put in the time, money, sweat,
etc. that it takes to complete at that level, and I have nothing but respect
for those who do (and a desire for the occasional guest slot!).
I do think Dennis K2SX has an issue that is worth consideration, and hits the
folks like me more (basically the people who are serious, have decent stations
and operating skills) ..call us "The Tribander/Shorty 40/KW/1 or 2 operating
position crowd" :) The CQ contests are now 48 hour no time limit. For Single
Op ..SO2R is pretty well mandatory now. It's hard to do 48 hours without sleep
and harder to do as one ages. We can do SO2R with a 4O3A multiplexer ...but
that is expensive ..and ..if we want to do a DXpedition type of op ..not really
practical. The answer for some of us would likely be a "Classic M/S" (2 or 3
ops sharing a single position) ...but M/S now means M/M with lockout. That's
a lot of fun btw ..and I've been part of several teams who have done it that
way. It is however ..just a completely different type of operation. I'd sure
like to see some category like "Classic M/S" with a clear limit of 1 active
radio. Like anything ...it would have to be mostly self enforced ..but I think
the type of folks who want the category will do a good job with it. I know CQ
contests now have a "Classic Rules" (24 hour limit) category ..perhaps a
"Single Radio Only" category would be the ticket. That would also take care of
the folks (like myself again) who like doing the dxpedition type thing, but
find setting that up for SO2R to be impractical.
From: CQ-Contest [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of Martin
Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2015 6:08 AM
To: Mats Strandberg <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: Bokverket <email@example.com>; CQ-Contest <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Category hopping, new angle
How can an M2 win over an MM. It is very simple actually. You only need to take
the geographic factor into account. An MS in zone 33 or 35 can easily achieve a
higher score than a full fledged MM in zone 13 for example. That is why to me,
because of the nature of amateur radio contests, and also in most cases because
of the rules of them, competition at a world level is sort of a fantasy.
If you set up two stations that are exactly the same, you clone the crew of
operators, one station in JA, the other in D4, there will be no way for the
station in JA to win "the world".
If competition was done at a zone level it would be a little more like a real
competition and less like it has been so far.
I really believe if it was done that way, more and more people would feel
motivated to enter the contests and the ones who already enter would feel more
motivated to do it more seriously.
El dic 10, 2015 10:58, "Mats Strandberg" <email@example.com> escribió:
> (Sorry, sent away my message before finished)
> Yes, agree with Goran.
> The main issue is that MM competition this year was weak and in case
> we had a few really competitive MM efforts, no chance would have been
> for CR3L to lead the claimed scores.
> The discussion is so much about "ethics" and "unsportsmanlike behaviour"
> where as the focus should be:
> Why on earth is it possible to win MM with a M2 or a M/S station?
> Not knowing fully the setup of PJ2T, and all the issues they might
> have had with power failures and antennas that were not delivered on
> site, normally,
> PJT2 could easily have won the MM category and could easily have had
> 10 Million more points than any M/S or M2 station.
> So, instead of debating this into some absurd dead end, focus on
> having fun, on planning for a gigantic attack on the MM first position in
> You can, and you should not, win if your effort in any category is
> World Class. Obvisously PJ2T had issues and problems that prevented
> them from winning this year. Let's face it and realize that during the
> 2016-2021 (at least), they will have far better chances than most
> other stations. The location PJ2 is better than most locations in the
> world. They should logically have no issue to beat any M2 station in the
> There are no moral winners - there is only one: The station with most
> points in each category. Whether you like it or not, that is the way
> CQWW works. Nothing prevents anyone from posting a score on 3830. This
> is not the official site for CQWW.
> 73 de Mats RM2D (SM6LRR)
> 2015-12-10 0:33 GMT+03:00 Bokverket <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> > Re the big M/2 MM switch debate: I noticed to my surprise when
> > viewing
> > raw scores that CN2AA who tops the M/S category with nearly 35
> > megapoints could presumably also have switched to M/M and won it
> > easily over CR3L's approximately 32 megapoints.
> > Which is the greater accomplishment, achieving an amazing score with
> > one, two or two+ transmitters? What a feat.
> > All the best from the northern latitudes,
> > Goran Fagerström
> > SM0DRD
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest mailing list