QUACK's
The suggestion that the contest can't be changed is not really a serious one
I would hope, Everything thing changes. A few years back the ARRL DX
contest was a 2 weekend afair .
I can rember operationg it from Japan and working all states on 10-15 and 20
and only missing a couple on 40. I was disappointed when they cut it to 1
wkend, OH Well S--t happens. Live with it there IS NOT anything that can
be done to equalize the race for the top score.
Just consider this a new contest and go from there. The object today is to
try and encourage more of the Young Shack on the Belt types to get on HF
and get a piece of paper for the wall.
My Quack's Worth $.02
----- Original Message -----
From: "ve6tn" <ve6tn@shaw.ca>
To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 18:26
Subject: [CQ-Contest] The New ARRL DX Contest
> It would appear that individuals-of-influence are now seriously
considering
> making changes to the way ARRL DX contests are scored.
>
> The ARRL DX contest of the future will no longer have a single ARRL
contest
> winner with rankings of all stations. Instead, there will be many
regional
> winners none of whom officially compete against each other. Desparities
due
> to location or regulation will be eliminated and a contest station in VY
> will no longer compete against W1 nor would a W1 compete against W2, or
> wherever the boundaries have been drawn. One can envision the
circumstance
> where old rivals across a regional boundary from each other will now no
> longer be competitors.
>
> There will no longer be a single station who can claim that they won the
> ARRL DX SSB contest. Canada will be relegated to a different status in
the
> ARRL and more in-line with DX.
>
> What about all of the old records and history of this contest? Do they
all
> get recalculated based on the new criteria? Rather than change the rules
> perhaps it is time to retire the old contest, declare it ended. Make the
> 2005 or 2006 year the officially the last one. This will preserve all of
> the old records and history and eliminate debate.
>
> Going forward the ARRL can start a "New" contest to replace the old. Call
> it the "New ARRL DX Contest" and introduce new rules, scoring, and ranking
> that are fair for everyone. An extensive handicap and weighting system
> could be deployed. Individials strive to set their handicap. Stations
get
> weighted against each others based on location, number of towers, height,
> antenna's.
>
> If the ARRL comes up with a way of normalizing one region against the
other,
> then perhaps they could still declare weighted national results. But this
> new comparison would have to be based on weighted criteria not on raw
score.
> Some sort of handicap system based on geography, auroral zone, national
> rules, maybe even equipment. The structure could be done so that there
was
> a ranking based on "station performance" and one based on "operator
> performance". Just like in golf or other sports, when the technology is
> eliminated you end up with raw "skill" as the deciding factor. This way
> those who build stations can see their ranking for their station while
those
> who operate get scored and ranked against each other.
>
> Year after year historical rankings could also be normalized using a
> weighting of SFI/A/K and geomagnetic storms. So a solar peak year could
be
> compared to a solar minimum year.
>
> I guess I am trying to make a point. When you change the rules where do
you
> draw the line? The old rules have served us well for a long time and to
> change them really upsets the history of what this contest means. The
> American who built a station in VY2 is to be commended in every way for an
> absolutely incredible contesting feat. Complaining about unfairness in
> national rules or advantages of location sure comes across as sour grapes.
> If I were that person I would be very disappointed that someone would be
> trying to cheapen my victory by making claims that it was based on unfairn
> competition or that the rules were tilted. Everyone serious at this level
> of contesting all have the same rule-book.
>
> If anyone wants a better contesting location than VY then here is an idea:
> Purchase property just outside St. John Newfoundland and build a
> superstation. Your advantages would be salt water take-off, improved
> greyline timing and short signal path to Eu and AF because they are
halfway
> to England, proper skip distance/angle to duck under the auroral zone for
> those JA's, a rare ARRL section, very cheap realestate, and an incredible
> vacation opportunity as the Newfoundland people are hospitable like none
> other, the USD exchange rate is pretty good and all Amateur gear is duty
> free from anywhere in the world, and lastly you can legitimately run 2.5
KW
> "Output" since that is Canada's power maximum and any mode can be used in
> any part of any amatuer band without band restrictions.
>
> Barry - VE6TN
>
> P.S. If we want to add a rule to restrict Canadians to using the US band
> allocation for SSB contests, fine. We need some sort of way to enforce
the
> power restrictions as well as I think someone running outside of their
power
> limit is a much bigger advantage than parking on a slightly lower
frequency
> and avoiding QRM.
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.4 - Release Date: 4/6/2005
>
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|