In WNY, I observed casual contesters who stayed “on the air” much longer than
they would have otherwise. Knowing where to go to find activity seemed to be
exactly what they needed to stay engaged. Then again I also listened to a 10
minute pileup on 146.55 FM.
If I was a contest sponsor, my primary indicator of success or failure is the
number of people who participate. If its going up, I stay the course and make
no changes. If going down for a few years, I better do something. Based on
that metric, nothing seems to be needed right now. For those of us who have
been part of a large organization, have you ever tried to argue against the
metrics!? (better luck buying a lottery ticket). Now argue you have found a
better indicator that is a predictor of success, rather than a reflection of
past performance and people will listen.
Again, if I was the contest sponsor, I would look at the numbers and say that
VHF+ contesting is in a recovery period and doing very well. Stay the course.
Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10
________________________________
From: VHFcontesting <vhfcontesting-bounces@contesting.com> on behalf of Rick R
<rick1ds@hotmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2019 10:43:57 AM
To: vhf contesting <vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Subject: [VHFcontesting] Digital and VHF contests
I’m resending this to a wider readership. Having been the author of the June
VHF contest results for QST for several years (prior to FT8) I had all of the
entrants scores. In a nutshell, 90% of those log submissions were “low” scoring
casual contesters. My read is that most were out to join in the fun, give out
points to the big guns and multis, say hi to another VHFer and to perhaps get
some new grids. They operated for a few hours when the bands were busy—and the
detailed Packrat log reviews done by WA3RLT showed the first few contest hours,
Sat eve and Sunday eve as peak times, at least for the Mid-Atlantic and
northeast. Now it is far more difficult for that casual op to find the
concentrated activity except on the FT8 frequency. And moving up the bands
based on a completed FT8 contact is problematic. More recently I have been
writing up the QST EME contest results and there are similar issues regarding
digital vs CW, especially for contests. The introduction of JT65 has been a
great boon to EME activity, yet there is still substantial CW activity. I
don’t have any solutions to returning to the activity of the past, but here are
some thoughts.
There have been EME contest activities sponsored by EU groups (ARI) that were
digital only or CW/SSB only. The ARRL EME contest separates results of those
who use CW/SSB only from those who use digital only or digital plus CW/SSB.
Many have suggested that CW and/or SSB QSOs be given a higher point value than
digital contacts. Others have proposed credit for multiple QSOs on the same
band with the same station for 2 or 3 modes. Others thought there should be
separate contests for digital and other modes.
Hopefully the ARRL radiosport staff will evaluate what is happening and get an
adhoc committee to discuss and make recommendations regarding VHF contests. We
have been given fantastic tools with digital programs. We need to be able to
utilize them and yet maintain a balance that keeps some of the personality of
the stations and operators on the air that makes it easy and fun for the casual
VHF contesters who are the real majority of those on the air for the contest
weekends who help feed the logs and scores of the big guns. Rick K1DS
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|