[CQ-Contest] WRTC Selection Criteria

[Kelly Taylor]

I have to side with Steve on this one.

Ward's Olympic analogy, while well-intentioned, is a little flawed: with
indoor running tracks, a runner in Siberia could develop the necessary
talent to compete at the Olympic level without having to move to a training
facility on Easter Island or Galapagos.

In Amateur Radio, that ability doesn't exist everywhere in the world. If
what Ward is saying is that only those operators who live in New England,
only those operators with the wherewithal to build competitive stations in
D4 or EA9 or HC8, only those operators with either a flexible enough work
schedule -- or no work schedule at all -- to guest op around the world can
play in WRTC, then I've just lost all interest in WRTC. (And this doesn't
even include the large cost of attending a WRTC.)

Ability shouldn't be measured by results alone: here in the Black Hole, we
have a number of highly skilled operators who are never going to win a
contest simply because of geography, yet in the right setting, could be very
competitive. Given the large geographic advantage of Puerto Rico, if someone
goes there and wins a large number of SSs in a row, does that necessarily
make them a better operator than someone in Johnson City, Tx, or Boring,
Ore.?

If WRTC is only going to be for the rich, then maybe the rest of us can just
ignore it altogether. Somehow, I don't think that's what anyone intends.

73, kelly
ve4xt

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve.Root at culligan.com" <steve.root at culligan4water.com>
To: "Ward Silver" <hwardsil at centurytel.net>; "CQ-Contest Reflector"
<cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 3:16 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WRTC Selection Criteria


> Ward,
>
> I agree in pronciple with what you are saying, but...If I may quibble with
> you a little bit:
>
>
> > Contesting (the overall sport) is, in fact, wide open to all
competitors.
> > That's how you demonstrate your competitive abilities.
>
> Is DX contesting "wide open" to those who don't have Europe on their
> doorstep?  Are domestic contests "wide open" to those who don't have 1 hop
> skip into 2/8/9 land on 10 meters?  How do we recognize the competitive
> abilities of people off the beaten path?
>
> > Contesting is more than just operating.  It requires commitment and
> > dedication of resources - physical, financial, and emotional - to be
> > competitive in these things on a regular basis.
>
> How would you determine who has made that commitment?  Only the rich needs
> apply? How do you define competitive?  Top Ten box results?  If we rely on
> raw scores then the picture is very skewed.
>
> >The basic premise is,
> > "Given this set of rules and regulations, who has enough desire,
> fortitude,
> > and commitment to cut the mustard?"  People fail to succeed for all
sorts
> of
> > reasons, not all of them strictly related to ham radio or whatever sport
> > we're talking about here.
>
> Again, define "failure" or "cut the mustard".  How can we say a given
score
> or a given operation was a failure?
>
> I think somewhere along the line we have to decide whether the WRTC idea
can
> survive if it continues to be supported and attended by a limited pool of
> participants, or if it has to embrace contesters from all areas.  The
> current WRTC is already lacking in support and  interest. It would be a
> shame to see the idea fade away.
>
> 73 Steve K0SR
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest