[CQ-Contest] WHAT IF
n6tj at sbcglobal.net
Sun Feb 25 13:40:17 EST 2007
Why we're all in the formative stages of What Ifing from Randy's excellent
notions, may I add a couple additional ideas? Thank you.
(1) Our ARRL National Contest Journal take on the sponsorship of these
Contests Within A Contest.
Comment: The NCJ is frequently soliciting input to fill the pages.
Contest results a couple time a year, what's wrong with
publishing a few pages of interesting contest
results too?? The NCJ already has national circulation (duh) and
perhaps this would add to its international
flavor. The CQ Contest Magazine that K3EST engineered until its
premature demise was excellent, and perhaps with
some infusion of enthusiasm, help, sponsorship, and
awards - the NCJ can become more than it is today.
Comment: An NCJ Contest Committee be formed to administer the
Parallel Contests. (We should have no difficulty
attracting enough 'volunteers' to add this
Prestige to their contesting resume's.)
(2) Initially, at least, these Parallel Contests be restricted to the four
48 hour behemoth's: CQ WW DX and ARRL DX. (The other MAJOR - CQ WPX -
already allows one to operate less than 48 hours, and compete).
(3) The Parallel categories are restricted to Single Operator. Do we still
have UNASSISTED and ASSISTED classes? One thought would be to just have it
ASSISTED. Anyone can use packet, or not, but you're all in the same
category - so do whatever works best for you?
(4) 12-hours or 24-hours???? Maybe both. If the sponsor can manage 24
hours, probably it can manage 12 hours, too.
(5) Each competitor submits his entire log for adjudication. He can be in
the 12 hour category or 24 hour category, but NOT both. In his submittal,
the competitor identifies the 12 hours (clock hour) OR 24 hours that he is
submitting. Thus he can operate as much of the 48 hours of the contest that
he wants, and when it's over he picks his best 12 or 24. The 12 or 24 do
not have to be consecutive.
COMMENT: Obviously for this to really work and minimize log checking
grief, there should be a presumption of playing
fair and with total integrity. The log
checkers and committee will more than have their hands full, and will
certainly hope for this, and for it having any
chance of working.
(6) Categories be established similar, but not exactly, to the existing
ARRL DX and CQ WW DX today. That is, highs in ARRL by country for DX and
State or Province for W/VE. For CQ WW, highs for country and for W/VE call
area ( i.e., W1, W2, VE4, etc).
(7) Perhaps the existing ARRL DX and CQ WW DX committees will participate in
this undertaking by merely providing their respective UBN analyses to the
NCJ Committee as an aid its adjudication efforts? Thanks in advance.
(8) And finally, we set a goal of CQ WW DX this fall to give this a try??
What do we have to lose??
Jim Neiger N6TJ
More information about the CQ-Contest