CQ WW DX Contest Categories - de N4KG
Several years ago, K1AR amazed the world with what he could do
with a SINGLE TRANSMITTER and hundreds of ASSISTANTS
(electronic spotters on packet). Since he did not want to be constrained
by the 10 minute rule in Multi-Single, he entered as a M/M. Obviously
he could not compete with the real Multi-Transmitter Multi-Operator
stations, and CQ created the mythical SINGLE OPERATOR ASSISTED
category.
Single operator assisted allowed entrants to benefit from spotting
networks and therefore became quite popular with average home
station contesters who did not like missing multipliers and/or new
countries or new band countries. They could employ the
ASSISTANCE of literally HUNDREDS of spotters ( in W1/2/3 )
but NO ASSISTANTS at their own station.
A slight change in SCOPE would be to allow a replacement operator
as well as packet spotting networks. This would encompass the
existing Single Operator Assisted category AND allow for the use
of replacement operators. Such a category could be called
MULTI-Operator / ONE Transmitter (which is really what S/O/A is
anyway with the restriction that the assistants just can't be at
your station). It would be the perfect category for 2 or 3 guys to
get together at a single tower tribander and low band antenna
type station. By changing the SCOPE of SOA to M/O, the total
number of categories would remain the same. John Superoperator
could still sit in the chair for 48 hours by himself if he wanted to
and still kick everyone else's butt and us old farts could take a
nap while the new kid on the block got in some operating time.
(Where do you think WN4KKN got his exposure to contesting?)
(Answer : at N4KG using a couple of tribanders and wires.)
The S/O, M/S, and M/M categories would be unaffected. M/S is
a challenging and fun category but it DOES take a lot more to be
competitive than most small stations can muster, especially
if you are more than 2 hops away from Europe. ( I used to be
very active in this category from N4AR in the 70's and 80's where
we set an all time M/S CW record that lasted for 6 years until
the K1AR, K1EA, K1GQ team did it right from New England.
We used 5 man teams with 2 or 3 multiplier stations and
LOTS of BIG antennas.)
de Tom N4KG
............................
On Thu, 6 Nov 1997 08:59:17 -0500 (EST) DougKR2Q@aol.com writes:
>In a message dated 97-11-06 08:11:23 EST, N4KG wrote:
>
><< It's a shame there is no place for two or three aging contesters
> to get together at an average home station to enjoy the CQ WW
> contests. >>
>
>Oh come Tom. How can you say this? 2 or 3 aging contesters CAN get
>together
>to ENJOY the CQWW contest. If you don't like the M/S limits, go M/M!
>If
>your objective is to ENJOY the contest, then ENJOY IT! If you want to
>limit
>your m/m to just 2 or 3 guys, DO IT!
>
>I think what I am reading is that there is need to have a category
>where 2 or
>3 aging guys can WIN. Winning is a function of your motivation. If
>you are
>so driven to WIN, then you will find a way to 1) improve your station
>2)
>improve your skills.
>
>As just mentioned by W2A, they APPEAR to have done an exemplary job
>using ONE
>SET of antennas on a SMALL CITY LOT.
>
>But if you out to ENJOY the contest (which I bet W2A op's did too!),
>then you
>can do anything you want as a group...just enter M/M!
>
>de Doug KR2Q
>
>[the opinions expressed above are my own and are NOT necessarily those
>of any
>group, or committee that I may be associated with.]
>
>
>--
>CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
>Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
>
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|