[CQ-Contest] WPX Survey results #4 - Operating Time Limits

[Randy Thompson K5ZD]

The purpose of the survey was to gather the opinions of the WPX Contest
participants.  In that regard, it did exactly what was expected and did so
extremely well!  I love that there are so many people with enough passion
and interest to respond.

If you ever wonder about the general appeal or interest in contesting, do a
state QSO party.  It is amazing how many guys will call in and deliver the
exchange perfectly without prompting.  They heard you calling CQ, they
answer and give you the point.  Maybe they aren't interested in seriously
competing, but they enjoy ham radio, working stations, and helping out.
This is all good!

All a contest sponsor can do is issue the invitations and host the party.
Who comes and how much fun they have is up to them.  The best the rules can
do is provide more opportunities for fun and competition among those players
who do join in the game. My hope is that the competitors tell their friends
about the fun and invite them to come to the next party.

Randy, K5ZD


> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com 
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of David Gilbert
> Sent: Friday, November 06, 2009 4:34 PM
> Cc: Randy Thompson K5ZD; cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WPX Survey results #4 - Operating 
> Time Limits
> 
> 
> I'm not sure the 15% figure for a return to 30 hours is 
> totally valid (I voted to stay at 36 hours, by the way).  The 
> survey results are of course very interesting and very 
> useful, but we have to be careful about using survey results 
> to assess the attitudes of people who may not have 
> participated in the survey. 
> 
> Randy initially sent out the questionnaire to those who had 
> submitted logs for WPX contests in 2008 and 2009, and then 
> later opened it up for anyone else that might subscribe to 
> the various contesting newsletters 
> or visit contesting web sites or otherwise find out about the 
> survey.   
> He pretty much hit everyone he had access to, but my guess is 
> that the survey still missed lots of casual contesters, and 
> in particular the very sub-group of hams who might NOT be 
> serious contesters because of the time commitment involved 
> for a serious entry.  It's kind of like going to a Mexican 
> restaurant and asking the patrons if they'd come more often 
> or spend more money there if the restaurant added Chinese 
> food to the menu ... too much pre-filtering of the participants.
> 
> If we want to know whether shorter time categories would lure 
> more people into contesting, or make them more seriously 
> active, we need to particularly ask that group of people.  
> One possible way to accomplish that might be to analyze the 
> submitted logs to find the callsigns that were reasonably 
> active but did NOT submit logs, and then bounce that list off 
> QRZ.com or similar database to find their email addresses.
> 
> Just a thought ...
> 
> 73,
> Dave   AB7E
> 
> 
> 
> brian coyne wrote:
> > I am open to the idea of creating a limited time category. 
> However, I don't want to give people a reason not to be on 
> the air and making contacts!  What do you think is the best 
> solution?  (K5ZD).
> >
> > Your survey shows that less than 15% want a return to the 
> 30hr limit.
> > With regard to the limited time category presumably those 
> who requested this must fall into the 'Other' category of 
> 3.4% so far fewer than 20% want less operating time.
> >
> > Remember you will not just add another category if you add 
> say a 12 hour section, you will need all the sub categories 
> for that section too such as hp, lp, qrp, assisted, etc etc, 
> guys will want certificates, plaques, needing more sponsors. 
> Also ops who would normally have entered the full section 
> will 'cherry pick' the best hours chasing prizes in the new section.
> >
> > Not a change to be considered lightly - wpx is great as it 
> is - don't mess with it.
> >
> > 73  Brian 5B4AIZ  (C4Z).
> >
> > --- On Fri, 6/11/09, Randy Thompson K5ZD <k5zd at charter.net> wrote:
> >
> >   
> >> From: Randy Thompson K5ZD <k5zd at charter.net>
> >> Subject: [CQ-Contest] WPX Survey results #4 - Operating Time Limits
> >> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> >> Date: Friday, 6 November, 2009, 1:59
> >> The latest chapter of the WPX Contest survey results have 
> been posted 
> >> at  http://www.cqwpx.com/blog/
> >>
> >> This installment covers the question asking if the maximum 
> operating 
> >> time for single operators should be changed.  The comments 
> range far 
> >> and wide and are very entertaining!
> >>
> >> 73,
> >>
> >> Randy Thompson, K5ZD
> >>
> >> Director - CQ WPX Contest
> >>
> >> email: k5zd at cqwpx.com
> >> web: www.cqwpx.com
> >>
> >>
> >> PS - Direct link to the post:  http://www.cqwpx.com/blog/?p=49
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> CQ-Contest mailing list
> >> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> >> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >>
> >>     
> >
> >
> >       
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >   
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>