Jim/Pete
Yeah ..I wanted to ditto that ...this is more about the "seriously casual"
op ...who wants to compete ..but just can't manage the true masochism
necessary to do 44-48 hours.
This actually got me thinking about VK4KW's comment about having too many
categories. I'm only speaking for myself ..as always ..but to me a category
should be something where ...people actually *want* to compete ..rather than
just something created to justify a certificate ..and likely will over a
long enough time such that people can set goals ...and compare their
performance both against themselves and others. "Classic" in WW and WPX
just seems natural ..while the overlay for say "tribander, wire antennas,
and 100W" (I think that is a real overlay) just seems ...silly.
73
Steve KL7SB (currently in radio silence with the A Index in the 60s)
-----Original Message-----
From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
Pete Smith N4ZR
Sent: Thursday, December 31, 2015 2:12 PM
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW survey results
Jim, it wasn't the 1 percent who reported that they would operate more hours
in CQWW if there were a 24-hour category. It was true a decade ago, and I
think it would be true now, if we'd let it. The current Classic category is
a step in the right direction.
73, Pete N4ZR
Download the new N1MM Logger+ at
<http://N1MM.hamdocs.com>. Check
out the Reverse Beacon Network at
<http://reversebeacon.net>, now
spotting RTTY activity worldwide.
For spots, please use your favorite
"retail" DX cluster.
On 12/31/2015 11:04 AM, James Cain wrote:
> Seems to me there are two rationales for any 24-hour category:
>
> 1) A way for Big Guns to have another category in which they can "win,"
and are willing to spend the entire 48 hours "in" the contest, plotting
their air times and off times.
>
> 2) A way for operators with "second tier" stations to have another
category in which they can "win," and are willing to spend the entire 48
hours "in" the contest, plotting their air times and off times.
>
> Having stations like this unavailable to work for half the contest by all
the lesser mortals in the lower tiers reduces those folks' ability to work
them.
>
> Doesn't this reduce the incentive for those of us who are mere commodities
to get on at all?
>
> Hearing from the One Percent is getting tiresome.
>
> K1TN
>
>
> -------------
>
> I don't know about 2014, but I can speak to my own experience doing
classic in 2015.
> I operated all but 4 hours of the first 24 hours. On the 2nd day, I
operated an hour at 06Z, and 3 hours between 14Z-17Z. That hardly required
the entire weekend to be invested.
> I'll be #2 or #3, depending on log checking.
>
> 73,
> Steve, N2IC
>
> On 12/30/2015 04:24 PM, RT Clay wrote:
> For the 2014 CQWW Classic CW, NA top 10 scores, here is the amount of
> time stations had available for the contest ( (last qso time) - (first qso
time) ):
>
> K3ZM/4 45:47
> N4AF 40:57
> N8II 42:12
> WC1M 40:48
> KU2M 46:59
> K9MA 47:02
> WU2X 40:30
> K2NV 47:58
> W1AW/3 47:57
> K9DU/0 42:37
>
> If you only could get 24 hours free, instead of the whole weekend free
> to pick your op times, good luck! A real 24 hour category does not
> require investing the whole weekend in the contest.
>
>
> Tor
> N4OGW
>
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, December 30, 2015 2:05 PM, Steve London
> <n2icarrl@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> There is a 24 hour category. Single-op, classic. Lots of fun !
> 73,
> Steve, N2IC
>
> On 12/30/2015 10:33 AM, Steve wrote:
> How about a 12 or 24 hour category and also a 48 hour category?
>
> Steve AA4V
>
> Sent from my I-Phone
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|