This is a summation of comments I made to the ARRL VHF+ Ad-Hoc
Committee back in April, but too late to include in the final report. It
has just
been loitering in an email folder since then.
I don't have the bandwidth to pursue this, but it seemed appropriate to
throw
this out to the VHF+ community for consideration. It is something that a
VUAC
committee could consider when formed. I toss it out here for your
consideration.
73, Ward N0AX
Pack Circling
The problem here is maintaining a healthy rover class. Roving is one of the
fastest-growing classes in all of contesting. We need to do all we can to
nurture it.
Grid circling and pack roving completely satisfy the current rules. We
understand
what grid circling is: Repeated sequences of contacts between rover stations
from adjacent grids around a multi-grid boundary point. We understand what
pack roving is: Two or more rovers that travel together and repeatedly make
contacts from the same locations. Grid circling becomes a big problem when
done repeatedly by pack rovers. For the purposes of this discussion, let's
call that behavior "Pack Circling" (PC).
Pack Circling is a "disruptive strategy" that results in a non-competitive
separation of scores between two populations of competitors. It is not an
"evolutionary improvement" that results from an improvement in technology or
operating skill. PC rover scores are completely disjoint from those of
non-PC rovers, as if M/M and SOAB were scored in the same class on HF.
Keeping PC and non-PC rovers in the same class would be patently unfair to
the latter and discourage them from participating. Furthermore, there is
little benefit to other competitors from this behavior. The practice of PC
needs to addressed.
Restricting Classic rover-to-rover QSOs would not be a good idea - there
is plenty of legitimate rover-to-rover activity. Coming up with the
understandable, but enforceable, formula to distinguish Pack Circling is not
easy. Assume we have two rover categories: Classic and Unlimited. Classic
rovers are not permitted to do PC and Unlimited is.
Here's an attempt at a differentiating rule for Classic Rover category:
Classic Rovers may not contact each other from different grids until at
least one
separating QSO has been made with a fixed station by each rover. QSOs with
that fixed station may not be used as separating QSOs by either rover again
in the contest.
This rule allows Class rovers to contact each other from different grids,
but they
have to make a QSO with a fixed station before moving to other grids. To
prevent a grid-circlers-plus-a-friend operation, once a fixed station is
used for the separating QSO, it can't be used again. So, for the N6MB et al
operation, there would have to be twelve unique fixed-station QSOs made by
each rover at each grid corner in order to complete the circle. A
four-rover pack would have to generate 48 unique QSOs at each grid corner.
That would pretty effectively keep pack circling out of Classic Rover, don't
you
think?
Two Classic Rovers can still meet up and do a band run between grids. If
they
can then each make a QSO with a fixed station, even both making a QSO with
the same fixed station, that's OK and they can move to new grids. It makes
grid circling a lot harder to do more than once, though, even in populated
areas. Thus, it simultaneous raises the bar on grid circling and pack
roving as
undesirable activities within the Classic Rover category.
The question remains, can this be automatically detected in a
straightforward way? A precisely defined rule may be too difficult to
administer and I don't want to saddle the contest administrator with
detecting some combination of QSOs that's too finely nuanced. I can imagine
how I would set up a program to detect it - setting flags, building a list
of previously used separating calls, etc. but the devil's in the details.
The same
question goes for logging software developers that would have to build in
flags to note that a fixed station QSO is needed. Both the rover and the
contest log-checker need to be able to unambiguously determine whether
a station's operation meets the rules.
At the *moment*, PC is done by a rather small group. If we continue to
allow it in the one rover class, due to the competitive nature of
contesters, the regular rovers will begin to adopt elements of PC strategy
in order to improve their scores. This will gradually distort the existing
rover class and cause friction.
I don't see any reason to ban PC - it is a "sweet" technical and strategic
challenge to perform well. It it just insular and distorts an existing
category.
If we can keep PC from infecting the Classic Rover category, over time
it might evolve into something less exclusive that contributes more to the
contest and contesting community overall.
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|