[CQ-Contest] CC&R Category

k8cc k8cc at mediaone.net
Mon Sep 25 00:41:34 EDT 2000


When CQ came up with the "tribander and simple antenna (TS)" category in CQ 
WPX, I was one of those who thought it was a dumb idea.  In retrospect I 
was wrong - TS has turned out to be extremely popular, because it fits the 
needs of a large number of contesters.  Despite the discussion here on 
CQ-Contest a couple months ago, where certain people were trying to finesse 
the definition of what "a tribander" is (who do they think they are, 
President Clinton?), most hams have little trouble figuring out what the 
category allows.  IMHO, TS has been a big success.

I think the "CC&R" category Bill proposes has a lot of merit.  New hams, or 
perhaps those here in the USA who have recently been granted HF priviledges 
will more than likely be living in QTHs with CC&Rs.  I see this where I 
live - the township to the east of the K8CC QTH is undergoing a tremendous 
building boom, and I can't help but wonder as I drive by these subdivisions 
"How could anyone contest from these QTHs?"  A CC&R category would give 
these guys a shot.

I suspect there will be naysayers who grouse that newcomers with trap 
verticals aren't going to win anything.  They're probably right, but I 
don't think that's the point.  Rather, give these guys a category that 
gives them a chance - they'll get on, struggle, learn and improve.

I find little to fault in Bill's proposed description of the category, 
although my personal opinion is that the "one acre" limitation is too large.

Rather than creating a new category, perhaps come of the "CC&R" concepts 
could be applied to an existing category, such as the QRP class?  I never 
really understood the point for big stations with monobanders or stacked 
beams to enter the QRP class.  OTOH, I would think that most CC&R stations 
would want to run at least 100W with their modest antennas.  Maybe we need 
four categories - full power, low power, QRP & CC&R.

Let's agree on one thing right now - CC&R is single-op only.  We don't need 
(and I don't think the sponsors would support) another sub-category of the 
many multi-op classes.

73,


Dave/K8CC


--
CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com




More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list