CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] So Sunday Sucked?

To: RT Clay <rt_clay@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] So Sunday Sucked?
From: Kelly Taylor <ve4xt@mymts.net>
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2017 09:51:38 -0600
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
I like the idea of two QSOs split by time, as it means stations with the big 
low-band antennas aren’t necessarily going to run up the rate meter all over 
again. 

If you split it by high-band vs. low-band, you might not actually solve the 
Sunday doldrums problem, as the big stations might just work through all their 
second QSOs Saturday night anyway.

As well, making the split high-band vs. low-band will hand the contest to the 
stations with the big low-band antennas. The way SS works now, big low-band 
antennas aren’t a huge advantage because they primarily provide access to 
stations already worked on the high bands. The bigger low-band antennas in some 
way are a disadvantage, because the one-Q per station rule means they are more 
often working just the closer stations they couldn’t get on the high bands, 
just like stations with smaller low-band antennas (low inverted vees, etc.).

A way to solve Sunday doldrums without costing SS its democratization would be 
perfect.

I think splitting it by time solves the doldrums plus gives equal advantage to 
small and big stations.

73, kelly, ve4xt 
 
> On Nov 7, 2017, at 8:41 AM, RT Clay <rt_clay@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> 
> Allowing two qsos seems like the best idea to me so far. If one contact had 
> to be on the high bands (20/15/10) and one on the low bands (40/80/160) it 
> would be a little fairer to different geographic areas and still not require 
> everyone to have a 6-band station to do well. To give incentive for people to 
> operate longer, make each qso 1 point (less than it is now), and an extra 1 
> bonus point if you get both qsos with a station. Leave multipliers unchanged.
> 
> I am not sure if time restrictions (first half/second half/etc) are needed, 
> one qso on high versus low bands will usually spread the two contacts out in 
> time anyway due to propagation differences. Specific time restrictions also 
> won't be liked by part-timers who can only operate Saturday or Sunday. If any 
> changes are made to the rules they need to be simple to understand.
> 
> 
> Tor
> N4OGW
> 
> --------------------------------------------
> On Mon, 11/6/17, Eric Gruff <egruff@cox.net> wrote:
> 
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] So Sunday Sucked?
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Date: Monday, November 6, 2017, 10:13 PM
> 
> I don't normally get into these rule change
> discussions, because there are N
> + 10 opinions for every N hams, but it
> dawned on me that one or more of the
> following are fairly easy to implement,
> might stir more activity on Sunday
> afternoon/evening, and won't alter the
> contest enough to "hurt it" in the
> eyes of most purists:
> 
> 1. Split the time in half (15 + 15
> hours, or the first 24 and last 6 hours),
> and allow one QSO with each station in
> each segment. In other words,
> everyone can work each station twice in
> the contest, but you have to stick
> around to get the 2nd QSO. It might
> also help keep some of the rare mults on
> the air for long enough that we can all
> find them. I suppose we could count
> each multiplier once per half, thus
> giving folks incentive to try for a
> double sweep, but that's probably
> overkill. Dupe checking is going to be a
> bit more challenging, but pretty much
> everyone uses software that should be
> able to easily tell us if we can
> re-work a station in the 2nd segment.
> 
> 1a. Corollary to above - only allow the
> 2nd contact on a different band than
> previously worked. A bit more
> challenging, because you can't move someone
> after a QSO, but have to wait until the
> next segment of the contest to work
> them on the 2nd band.
> 
> 2. Give a QSO multiplier (1.5x ?) for
> contacts made in the last six or eight
> hours of the contest period.
> 
> Obviously, high scores will change for
> the first two scenarios, but at least
> folks will be incentivized to stick
> around at the end of the contest. I
> don't think either option will stop
> folks from participating at the
> beginning for a lot of reasons, and
> will make the strategy of choosing the
> 24 of 30 hours to operate a bit more
> challenging. IMO, the last six hours
> are one of the few advantages for us
> West Coast operators - we don't have to
> stay up until 10 PM (or later for folks
> in Atlantic Time) on a Sunday night
> to finish the contest.
> 
> NC6K
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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>