[CQ-Contest] Maximum Time Limit for S/O
n4zr at contesting.com
Tue Feb 20 08:12:11 EST 2007
If you made it a subordinate class within the contest, it is hard to see why the sponsors should object, except for the NIH syndrome.
A few years ago, a few friends and I tried to set up a 24-hour Challenge during CQWW. Our idea was to conduct it and issue a plaque totally separate from the CQ contest, except for relying on their final checked scores to determine the winner (we would have calculated the time ourselves). In preparation for it, we conducted a poll on Contesting.com, and by a 2:1 margin the ops who responded indicated that having such a class would increase their participation.
The reaction from the CQ group was succinct - hell no. THAT's the real hard nut to crack.
73, Pete N4ZR
At 06:24 PM 2/19/2007, Jim George wrote:
>Rick wrote the email that I was going to write. The idea that 48 hours
>makes any sense for a single operator is foolish. Frankly, some guys are
>going to die from blood clots, etc. The 36 hour max for S/Os is a terrific
>rule. It turns the contest into a strategic thing, not a blind stupid
>unhealthy endurance contest. I realize that there will be traditionalists
>who will make their usual arguments that stamina is part of the contest,
>and that a maximum time limit will somehow reduce participation. I disagree
>on all fronts. It will increase participation. It certainly will for me, as
>I will no longer operate any contest over 24 hours that lacks a maximum
>limit for single operators.
>If you are concerned that records will no longer be meaningful, who now
>cares that the ARRL DX contest used to be *two* weekends on both modes.
>It's time for the League to do the right thing; place a reasonable maximum
>time limit on this contest for single operators.
>Jim George N3BB
>At 12:45 PM 2/19/2007 -0800, Eric Hilding wrote:
>>After reading many "I couldn't operate more than 30, 35 or 40 hours" type
>>comments in 3830 posts, it's that time again for my Annual Suggestion to
>>add a "36 out of 48 Hours" category (or something like that) to the ARRL
>>DX Contest for those of us in the Geriatric Generation.
>>I appreciated the past supportive comments of AL, D4B/4L5A, and others who
>>also believe that such a Category might actually increase activity. OF's
>>who aren't willing to make a serious effort or sacrifice their health
>>knowing they can't (or won't) be able to do the entire 48 hours are more
>>likely to go like proverbial bats-out-of-h*ll for 36 hours in the chance
>>to competitively win something.
>CQ-Contest mailing list
>CQ-Contest at contesting.com
More information about the CQ-Contest