Competitive vs. achievement contesting

[/R=UTRC/R=MRGATE/U=RJA/FFN=RJA/ at mrgate.utc.com]

There seems to be a notion that those in favor of a 24-hour class 
are wimps who need a new class because they can't make the top-ten.
I don't agree with that sentiment -- my impression was that those 
who want the class are those who actually DO 48-hours and make the
top-ten, as well as those who'd like to make all-out efforts but can't
do 48 hours for one reason or another.   Single-band efforts for 
those who want to do competitive contesting are not the answer --
the added dimension of band-changing strategy is gone.  The 24-hour
class makes COMPETITIVE contesting more palatable.  Unfortunately,
there aren't too many COMPETITIVE 24-hour DX contests around (IARU
Radiosport is the only one that immediately comes to mind).
 
Achievement awards are great, but you're competing against yourself,
not against others.  I'm all for achievement awards, in fact, I was
chairman of the CAC when we pushed for SS pins, and it worked.  We
definitely need achievement awards and incentives for DX contests 
(Contest DXCC, WAS, 1000 Q's, DXCC credits for contest QSO's without 
the need for QSL cards, etc.).  I think casual achievement-oriented ops
need incentives like these to operate the contests.  But let's not
confuse ACHIEVEMENT awards with COMPETITIVE awards.  
 
I'm not sure a COMPETITIVE 24-hour S/O class would work, but I'd like to
see it tried in the ARRL DX contest.  But let's add some achievement 
awards too.  Make sure both get enough publicity among contesters and 
non-contesters through QST, NCJ, PacketClusters, etc..  Let's see what 
happens.  If it doesn't work after a 2-year trial period, no harm done.
 
					-- Rich K1CC
					   rja at utrc.utc.com