My Ideal contest?
More or less all the same general rules we have now for almost any
contest. BUT with one major change. And a change that would place a
great deal of strategy into it. A time frame like the old novice roundup.
a 24 hour contest but it lasts 10 days. Say 00:00 zulu saturday the
first until 24;00 the 9th. but you can only operate a max of 24 hours.
This requires you to decide when is best to operate. not just brute
force, but skill like when will the most people be around? or when
is the bands open to the area you need more mults in? or the bands are
open but marginal, do you stick it out, or shut down and hope for
better conditions later, but will they be better later,,,,,
Lots of thinking of when will be the best time on,,, In addition, with
a time frame like this there is no reason that anyone should not be able
to get all 24 hours in.
That would be my dream test.
Joe WB9SBD
Felipe J Hernandez wrote:
>all,
>
>1. To make the sprinters happy (guys with few hours)
>
>A. 24 hr version run.. enought to keep serious ops motivated and willing to
>spend time on improving their stations.
>
>B. a best 8 hours... wonderful to have people from all over the world compete
>in almost equal terms
>
>
>2. Allow experimenters to do whatever they like on their category, make it a
>digital class
>come on let them do whatever they want most of them will never win but will
>have tons of fun and drag a lot of new people to the hobby.
>
>
>3. Give top 3 plaques on all mayor categories and ask for donations with
>log's
>paypal suggested with a limit of $5 US.
>
>4. Have decent write ups... Move the detailed results entirely to the web and
>have something limited for written media.
>
>
>Felipe
>NP4Z
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Robert Chudek - K0RC
> To: Chris (DL8MBS) ; Randy Thompson K5ZD ; CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> Cc: 'Shelby Summerville'
> Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 2:54 PM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Xtreme category, catch 22
>
>
> My comment is a deviation from the main topic and discussion. I read the
> article Chris posted on his website, where a non-amateur was aghast that our
> contest scoring system does not take into account the amount of time that
> can be invested by each operator.
>
> I (also) have always thought it would encourage contesting activities (and
> the "fun factor") to define a separate category "Best of x hours." I know a
> few contests already embrace this philosophy in one form or another. BARTG
> RTTY is one I believe. You can operate the entire event if you want or a
> 6-hour window and submit the abbreviated event as your entry for the
> contest.
>
> I would extend this concept to allow the contesters to select their "best
> rate" from their entire contest effort. As Chris' article suggest, there
> might be different "time categories", i.e., 0-3 hours, 3-6 hours, etc. A
> contester can then compete against others who have limited time resources
> and gain recognition of their efforts. Analyzing a log for "best of" time
> periods should be a menial task during log checking.
>
> 73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Chris (DL8MBS)" <prickler.schneider@t-online.de>
> To: "Randy Thompson K5ZD" <k5zd@charter.net>
> Cc: "'Shelby Summerville'" <k4ww@arrl.net>; <CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 3:15 AM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Xtreme category, catch 22
>
>
> Randy Thompson K5ZD wrote:
>
> >But, I would love to hear more ideas about how contesting could be made
> >more
> >fun, more challenging, and generate more participation among the majority.
> >
> >
> Participation is ok as far as numbers go but I suppose there is not so
> much competetition and competetive feeling amongst the majority of
> participants. Handing out a few qsos and leaving the competetive field
> to the minority of Semi-Pros. I cannot help but to reiterate one point
> which contributes a lot to this: our competitors and participants do not
> go equal distances as it is the norm in real sports. Every player in a
> football game, every runner goes the defined duration of the sport be it
> in kilometres or minutes. In our contests a tiny fraction goes the full
> distance with the overwhelming majority dropping out much earlier as it
> is simply forced by the realities of life in an amateur activity. But no
> runner would feel as a competitor when he knows that he has to leave the
> race after one third of the distance (which is about the maximum
> participation time for about two thirds in our hobby, see at
> www.dl8mbs.de/40984/45289.html).
>
> I hear "We don´t need a wealth of categories for those only eager to
> earn awards without effort". We don´t need a wealth of categories but
> more consideration as it is reflected in 6-h-categories in RTTY or in a
> family-friendly 12h-category in IOTA. And perhaps organizers with
> online-awards can report whether the appetite for paper really is as big
> as some argue. It is not about awards but simply about the feeling of
> being a competitor running or playing on the same track as the big dogs.
> Btw "competing" does mean to rank as good as possible - not to win as
> single goal. This attitude is left to some of the big guns speaking
> about "lost weekends" or "low key efforts" doing >3k QSOs but not
> ranking No.1.
>
> But I see so much more concern and thinking about Formula-1-issues,
> again with the elaborate "Xtreme"-category. With our hobby having no red
> line like running or sailing (where tech-developments are not forbidden
> but where a defined core is exempt from them - like engines being still
> forbidden) the argument "It is bad to hinder tech development" wont stop
> even remote receivers allowing daytime "qsos" on 160 m impossible by
> only HF-means. But seemingly we "participants" got used over years to
> the separation into rate-boosting "cannon fodder" and "real
> competitors/contesters" as which only those are regarded going the
> (nearly) full distance and trying each and every gadget from station
> automation along antenna-extremes to skimmer and so on (each being
> interesting or fascinating developments from the mere tech-perspective).
>
> Should one argue in this situation for ONE basic
> equipment/100W/single-element-category with one third or the half of the
> maximum time period? (Please don´t cry "cannot be controlled" as long as
> power categories exist). I begin to doubt whether it will change much.
> It will be denounced by opinion leaders as "being not real contesting".
> And the worst: I am not sure whether there is a big interest in the
> group of participants to become competitors at least sometimes when they
> are in the mood for. Clearly hoping now to hear differing and more
> optimistic views.
>
> Nevertheless it will be possible to have fun in a contest and I will
> have it i.e. going to strange loacations and testing strange antennas -
> but it will be participating in an operating event not in a competition
> in which case I only would feel fooled when "contacting" a DX-station -
> which in reality only was his soooo advanced receiver two miles away.
>
> 73, Chris
>
> (www.dl8mbs.de)
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>Version: 8.5.374 / Virus Database: 270.12.76/2183 - Release Date: 06/17/09
>05:53:00
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|