[CQ-Contest] Xtreme category, catch 22

[Robert Chudek - K0RC]

My comment is a deviation from the main topic and discussion. I read the 
article Chris posted on his website, where a non-amateur was aghast that our 
contest scoring system does not take into account the amount of time that 
can be invested by each operator.

I (also) have always thought it would encourage contesting activities (and 
the "fun factor") to define a separate category "Best of x hours." I know a 
few contests already embrace this philosophy in one form or another. BARTG 
RTTY is one I believe. You can operate the entire event if you want or a 
6-hour window and submit the abbreviated event as your entry for the 
contest.

I would extend this concept to allow the contesters to select their "best 
rate" from their entire contest effort. As Chris' article suggest, there 
might be different "time categories", i.e., 0-3 hours, 3-6 hours, etc. A 
contester can then compete against others who have limited time resources 
and gain recognition of their efforts. Analyzing a log for "best of" time 
periods should be a menial task during log checking.

73 de Bob - KØRC in MN


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Chris (DL8MBS)" <prickler.schneider at t-online.de>
To: "Randy Thompson K5ZD" <k5zd at charter.net>
Cc: "'Shelby Summerville'" <k4ww at arrl.net>; <CQ-Contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 3:15 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Xtreme category, catch 22


Randy Thompson K5ZD wrote:

>But, I would love to hear more ideas about how contesting could be made 
>more
>fun, more challenging, and generate more participation among the majority.
>
>
Participation is ok as far as numbers go but I suppose there is not so
much competetition and competetive feeling amongst the majority of
participants. Handing out a few qsos and leaving the competetive field
to the minority of Semi-Pros. I cannot help but to reiterate one point
which contributes a lot to this: our competitors and participants do not
go equal distances as it is the norm in real sports. Every player in a
football game, every runner goes the defined duration of the sport be it
in kilometres or minutes. In our contests a tiny fraction goes the full
distance with the overwhelming majority dropping out much earlier as it
is simply forced by the realities of life in an amateur activity. But no
runner would feel as a competitor when he knows that he has to leave the
race after one third of the distance (which is about the maximum
participation time for about two thirds in our hobby, see at
www.dl8mbs.de/40984/45289.html).

I hear "We don´t need a wealth of categories for those only eager to
earn awards without effort".  We don´t need a wealth of categories but
more consideration as it is reflected in 6-h-categories in RTTY or in a
family-friendly 12h-category in IOTA. And perhaps organizers with
online-awards can report whether the appetite for paper really is as big
as some argue. It is not about awards but simply about the feeling of
being a competitor running or playing on the same track as the big dogs.
Btw "competing" does mean to rank as good as possible - not to win as
single goal. This attitude is left to some of the big guns speaking
about "lost weekends" or "low key efforts" doing >3k QSOs but not
ranking No.1.

But I see so much more concern and thinking about Formula-1-issues,
again with the elaborate "Xtreme"-category. With our hobby having no red
line like running or sailing (where tech-developments are not forbidden
but where a defined core is exempt from them - like engines being still
forbidden) the argument "It is bad to hinder tech development" wont stop
even remote receivers allowing daytime "qsos" on 160 m impossible by
only HF-means. But seemingly we "participants" got used over years to
the separation into rate-boosting "cannon fodder" and "real
competitors/contesters" as which only those are regarded going the
(nearly) full distance and trying each and every gadget from station
automation along antenna-extremes to skimmer and so on (each being
interesting or fascinating developments from the mere tech-perspective).

Should one argue in this situation for ONE basic
equipment/100W/single-element-category with one third or the half of the
maximum time period? (Please don´t cry "cannot be controlled" as long as
power categories exist).  I begin to doubt whether it will change much.
It will be denounced by opinion leaders as "being not real contesting".
And the worst: I am not sure whether there is a big interest in the
group of participants to become competitors at least sometimes when they
are in the mood for. Clearly hoping now to hear differing and more
optimistic views.

Nevertheless it will be possible to have fun in a contest and I will
have it i.e. going to strange loacations and testing strange antennas -
but it will be participating in an operating event not in a competition
in which case I only would feel fooled when "contacting" a DX-station -
which in reality only was his soooo advanced receiver two miles away.

73, Chris

(www.dl8mbs.de)
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest