[CQ-Contest] WRTC Selection Criteria

Steve.Root@culligan.com steve.root at culligan4water.com
Thu Dec 22 08:37:24 EST 2005

> The only generally acceptable solution offered to date is to regionalize
> competition.  The number of regions is directly proportional to the number
> of teams that the host committee can support.  Three regions in the US is
> not bad.  Six would be better and eight nearly ideal.  Various
> and comparative systems have been offered at various times, but they just
> don't seem to get traction for whatever reason.

The regional idea is fine.  The regions are just the wrong shape.  Any
consideration of propagation has to recognize that it is all about
lattitude, not longitude.  Nobody in my neighborhood can compete with the
8's in any kind of contest, much less the 5's.  They took one look at the
regional definitions and discarded th whole idea out of ahnd.

> I think a lot of the Top Ten guys do commit a great deal of energy and
> resources to contesting.  It's by no means a guarantee of success.  What
> else do we have besides the scores?  Where does the extra data come from?
> Who analyzes it and with what metrics? Who validates the data, the
> and the process?  All this takes work and it takes time.

Assuming you defined regions correctly, then people from within that region
would have the best idea of who their top candidates would be.  The basic
problem always has been, and continues to be, the influence of geography on
raw scores.  It is a major obstacle in defining the best operators for an
exercise like WRTC.  The regional scheme presented by the PY's is a step in
the right direction but is far from perfect at this point.

> Indeed.  In this case, fail means "fail to get enough qualifying points."
> In general, I just mean figuring how, within the rules of the game and
> whatever resources and planning you can bring to bear, putting up big
> numbers over a long enough period of time to get noticed as being
> in the most competitive categories of the contest.  Traditionally, this
> slights multi-op guys and stations operating in disadvantaged areas for
> specific contests - which is not always the same area, although having
> operated from the Midwest it certainly feels like it.
> One way around this perennial disadvantage and consequent low visibility
> better regional analysis of the final results - something I'm working hard
> to present in the ARRL DX Phone writeup as are other authors in some of
> other contests.  If we had a divisional writeup in every ARRL Contest and
> least a by-zone writeup (preferably more granular) in CQ and IARU and WPX,
> guarantee you that recognition would be higher farther down in the scores.
> My suggestion is to have your contest club "nominate" a separate,
> knowledgeable person from your region/division/zone to analyze the results
> in every contest and publish the analysis either in the sponsor's writeup
> on your own Web site.  Face it - contest sponsors are tapped out for
> resources.  If we want better this or that, then the contesters need to
> up and get the job done on their own.

Yes, yes, yes.  Especially with the advent of Internet reporting and the
increased amount of space it affords, we now have an opportunity to cover
contest results in depth and report on exceptional efforts in all areas.  We
just need people to step forward and be authors as well as operators.

> I wouldn't say there's a lack of interest - quite the opposite!

Here we disagree strongly.  After the political fallout of the last WRTC, I
can tell  you with absolute certainty that there is essentially NO interest
in WRTC in my part of the world.  After seeing the small number of
applicants I tried to encoutrage some people to at least apply.  It was like
asking people to jump off a building.  So far there's something like 60
applications world wide?  Sorry Ward, it looks to me like people are staying
away in droves.

> How about regional qualifier events between the main WRTC's?  How about a
> comparative rating system that is finer-grained than scores?  How about
> teams at WRTC - what if each region was responsible for raising the funds
> send its own team and the US contesters committed to eight regions at
> single WRTC?  I can tell you that it would sure help the WRTC organizers
> the regions themselves funded their teams like the Olympic countries do.

All good ideas, and I truly hope some of them happen.  As I said in an
earlier post it would be shame to see this idea fade away.

73 Steve K0SR

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list