[CQ-Contest] 10 minutes rule for M/S category

[Kelly Taylor]

Hmmm,
Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems that what is advocated here is
repealing the 10 minute rule, which makes octopi rules unenforceable, which
brings the octopi back, which will entice some to run M/M but since they
didn't transmit on two bands simultaneously claim M/S, which would put
honest M/S stations at an even greater disadvantage, which would encourage
more cheating, which would...

Why not instead keep the 10 minute rule, repeal the multiplier station rule
and make M/S truly M/S. If that means SO2R guys have an operational
advantage, who cares? It's not like M/S and SO scores compete against each
other, so there's no competitive advantage.

Seems as though it's easier to keep an eye on everything by getting rid of
the mult station than the 10 minute rule, which makes violations obvious in
the log.

73, kelly
ve4xt


----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick Tavan" <tavan at tibco.com>
To: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2003 1:14 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] 10 minutes rule for M/S category


> This is not exactly what you want, Eric, but it is a chance for me to
> rant about my pet peeve:
>
> Once upon a time there was a contesting category called multi-single
> defined as several operators sharing an operating position. Some
> aggressive folks figured out a way to bend the rules by staffing two or
> more positions simultaneously with electronics ensuring that only one at
> a time could transmit. This was called the "octopus" and offended other
> contest participants so much that the organizers outlawed the practice
> (nice thought) and required that once a M/S station made a Q on a given
> band, it must stay on that band for 10 minutes before making a Q on any
> other band (stupid). This is typical beauracratic thinking: No amount of
> inconvenience is too great if it prevents one bad apple from taking
> advantage of the majority of rule-abiding participants. It became
> intolerable as technology advanced to the point where SO2R was common
> because then such able stations could not be used effectively in M/S
> mode. Thus, a good SO2R single-op has an operational advantage over a
> M/S team. (Although the M/S team does not have the on-time restriction
> of a single-op.) There is also a rule exception that allows one other
> band to be used, but only for working new multipliers. This adds further
> software challenges to the competition as the two positions must
> synchronize timing, band use and mult needs. It also forces M/S entries
> to have two stations if they want to be competitive. Think about it -
> you need two stations to compete as a "multi-single!"
>
> My advice to everyone is to boycott the M/S category. Operate M/M
> instead so you can ignore the ridiculous ten minute rule. Then publish
> your results proudly as "Single Transmitter Multi-Multi." It is not an
> official category but it is much more fun. At least your peers on this
> reflector will understand your achievement and your protest.
>
> There is also a new Multi-Two category in this year's WPX. Most SO2R
> stations should be easy to rearrange for Multi-Two. This is also a great
> category for the larger station that is nonetheless too small or too
> thinly staffed for competitive multi-multi. Look for HC8N M/2 in WPX CW
> this year!
>
> GL & 73,
>
> /Rick N6XI
>
> Eric Castro PY2EMC wrote:
>
> >Hi all,
> >
> >Can someone explain to me (with example if possible) the 10 minutes rule
> >on the Multi-Single category for the WPX Contest ?
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>     The world's top contesters battle it out in Finland!
> THE OFFICIAL FILM of WRTC 2002 now on professional DVD and VHS!
>        http://home1.pacific.net.sg/~jamesb/
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest