[CQ-Contest] WRTC 2006 Sponsored Teams

Jim Neiger n6tj at sbcglobal.net
Wed Feb 1 01:54:06 EST 2006

Ken, your memory is as faulty as your logic.

In 2002, when I learned that $50,000 could sponsor a team, and informed you 
of same, you replied to me "so that's what it takes for me to get a team"? 
I said I guess so, and then said to you:  "Ken, if you DONATE $50,000 TO 
WRTC2002, then I will volunteer that you replace me on the (your) old boys 
team of N6AA/N6TJ" and/or recommend to Martti that you be granted a team. 
NEVER did I (seriously) offer to SELL you my place, and you know it.

As to lecturing anyone on etiquette, you might want to educate us on your 
compelling need to make your criticisms of Atilano public, rather than in a 
private post.

And finally, what you perceive in  Valery RD3AF selecting me as a team mate 
was "to my benefit", I have contested from southern Brazil on five 
occasions, and I was actually looking forward to going there as a tourist, 
have some fun with my family, and contesting and Brazilian friends, and deal 
with my declining health.   I again acquiesced out of respect to friends who 
wanted me to compete.  And to perhaps advance the cause of detente and 
amateur radio cooperation  between Russia and the USA.  What's wrong with 

 And herein, publicly, I will state that IF you donate $50,000 to WRTC2006, 
I will strongly recommend to Val that you take my place as his team mate.

I will also completely understand if he rejects this out of hand, for any 
amount of money.

Jim  N6TJ

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ken Widelitz" <widelitz at gte.net>
To: "Jim Neiger" <n6tj at sbcglobal.net>; "Cq-Contest Reflector" 
<cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 9:05 PM
Subject: RE: [CQ-Contest] WRTC 2006 Sponsored Teams

> Well, Jim, N6TJ, you are a charter member of the old boys club and I don't
> mean OLD boys club.
> As to my discussion with you and Martti, OH2BH, regarding your WRTC 2002
> selection, that was in a PRIVATE series of emails. Please check the
> CQ-CONTEST archives to confirm that fact. You should know it is VERY POOR
> etiquette to make a private email discussion public. However, since you 
> have
> chosen to make it public, I will remind you of the entire discussion. It
> began when the Wild Card teams were published by WRTC 2002. Per the WRTC
> 2002 wild card criteria, there were a number of entries with a higher
> ranking than yours, but they did not receive invitations. That was true 
> for
> a couple of other wild card invitees also. You and Martti are old friends,
> in the "old boys club" and you were invited. You emailed me that you were
> only going because you didn't want to insult Martti by turning down his
> invitation. Then you offered to sell me your spot for $50,000 donated to
> WRTC 2002. Remember?
> As to A61AJ, there was NO announcement a team was being sold for WRTC 
> 2002.
> The Brazilians announced 3 teams would be sponsored. Their rules stated
> those teams must have members of the same nationality. According to those
> rules it is NOT permitted to "choose whomever they desire to populate 
> their
> sponsored teams," as you misstated in your post. RD3AF decides he wants to
> team with you, Jim, N6TJ. Lo and behold, the rules get changed. I am not
> saying the change is good or bad, only that the rules were changed, 
> without
> prior publication, obviously for your benefit. And, as it has been pointed
> out to me in a private email, when WRTC 2000 and 2002 champions N5TJ/K1TO
> dropped out of WRTC 2006, the WRTC 2006 Committee apparently didn't invite
> the next best performing team from WRTC 2002.
> I have considered sponsoring a team for WRTC 2006. I still may.
> I have already publicly stated that if LA gets the Olympics in 2016, I 
> will
> volunteer to coordinate a WRTC in conjunction with that event. So much for
> your PUOSU Award.
> This is what I emailed Oms January 4, 2004, immediately after the
> announcement of WRTC 2006"
> Hi Oms,
> I don't know who will be working on the rules for the selection process 
> for
> teams for WRTC 2006, but I would very much like to see one that is NOT
> arbitrary and is totally OBJECTIVE. In other words, there should be a
> mathematical approach, not a beauty contest voting process.
> 73, Ken, K6LA / VY2TT
> Oms responded:
> Hi Ken:
> Nice to hear from you.
> Our intention is to have all the previous process, study these rules
> dipply and after that to develop a very open and transparent process. I
> know
> that a lot of friends has some compalains on the previous selections
> process.
> For sure we are not going to be perfect but at least totally transparent.
> I wish you and family a very happy, heathy and prosper new year.
> 73
> Oms PY5EG
> Whoops, I guess I just violated email etiquette. But so has the totally
> transparent part in changing the rules to accommodate you.
> I have let it be known that I didn't think it was fair that a higher
> mathematical weight be given to a 4 hour domestic sprint with a small 
> level
> of participation than to a 48 hour DX contest with a high level of
> participation. Despite my opinion, I still supported the WRTC 2006 
> Committee
> On December 21, 2005 I posted:
> Hi Oms,
> Thank you for your post.
> Please note that while there have been complaints about the criteria, no 
> one
> has questioned the intent, integrity or effort of the WRTC 2006 committee.
> The committee is to be commended for all three.
> 73, Ken, K6LA / VY2TT
> As to the U. S. National Selections, my post related to the ARRL's
> abdication of their assignment by WRTC 2006.
> With the exception of your email, the responses I have received to both of
> my posts have been in agreement with my position. In one, I was even told 
> it
> took "courage" to make that post. Apparently that came from someone who
> anticipated your personal and inaccurate attack. The "old boys club" 
> moniker
> is not insulting. It just is. That is not to say you are not a great
> contester. (double negative - you are a great contester.)
> You misstate that:
> Since 2002, Ken and everyone else had the opportunity to make sure their
> scores were going to be the best in the world.  They didn't, and they have
> no one to blame but themselves.
> The WRTC 2006 criteria was not announced until after those contests had
> taken place.
> So go ahead with your name calling. I have thick skin. I suppose it is 
> what
> you need to do to support your friends. It doesn't change the facts.
> 73, Ken, K6LA / VY2TT

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list