[CQ-Contest] the "problem" with M/S in WPX

[i4ufh]

Hi Guys

no one seem to remember  also the new mod of the rules, regarding that the 
serial # is non more by band as in the last years,
moving defacto to the past were even no 10min rules the serial # were unique 
and were M/S competitors should real know
in real time if they are doing right or not. Going back to this uniqe qso # 
allow more competition in strategy, undestanding
better the propagation and bands, allowing to analyze if is better stay on 
40 or 80 in the first night and knowing in real time if is the
right decision or not ... It's more fun ! Forget to compare to SO1R or 2R 
the PFX workable are limited and are linear proportional
to the QSO number, so work more QSO and u will get more mults, at the end 
the mults worked with the mults station will be
reworked again from the RUN during the next hours, so with execption of some 
special PFX as SOSB, the unique Pfx worked
from the mult station are below the 7% overall. This can make difference but 
the difference is done also with hi accuracy and
fast run. If the operators are boring well move into M2, u still have the HW 
with proper filters and stuff for a MS + mults station
so u know u can do it, otherwise the impact of this new proposal is minimal 
in the partecipation and in the final result.





----- Original Message ----- 
From: <kr2q at optimum.net>
To: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 1:37 PM
Subject: [CQ-Contest] the "problem" with M/S in WPX


> First, let's talk about how scores are generated:
>
> You need QSO's (points) and Mults.  DUH?  Not really....
>
> QSOs: More QSO's = more points.  You always want to be on the band where 
> you can
> maximize your QSO's.
>
>
> Mults:
> In CQWW in Oct and Nov, MULTS (other than monoband) are had by working 
> lots of Z and C on
> all 6 bands.  You MUST change bands and REWORK the same mults to build a 
> big mult (score).
>
> In WPX, mults only count once.  There is NO motivation to change bands to 
> work mults, unless
> you happen to find a "new one" on a different band.  But you can easily 
> work tons of mults by
> staying on a single band!  Somewhere in WPX Legend (maybe someone can find 
> the year or
> citation), I seem to recall that K1KI was monoband 20 and actually had a 
> bigger score than
> the All-band entry.  Think about that!  Zero reason to change bands to 
> work mults!
>
> Others have (correctly) cited this as the reason why WPX is a (nearly) 
> pure running contest.
> Very different than CQWW (that also explains, at least for me), the WHY is 
> this change being
> implemented (or is preliminary) and WHY would the two contests possibly 
> diverge in the rules.
>
> Still others have cited how "boring" it is for the other ops at WPX M/S 
> after the first 12 and
> especially after the 1st 24 hours...like no qso's per hour 
> (zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz).  Yup, they are
> right.  In fact, odds are good that the "new mults" they worked in the 
> first 24 hours using
> that "2nd radio" are reworked with the "main" radio in the next 24 
> hours....making their
> effort essentially worthless (other than QSO points).
>
> So...how do you craft a M/S for WPX?  Well, first of all, there is no 
> longer any constraint
> about "mults."  You are free to work anything (makes sense).  So why is 
> there a time
> limit at all then?  All you need is the "only one signal at a time" rule, 
> right?  Wrong?  How
> would the sponsor validate that?  By adding in the "8 changes" constraint, 
> the sponsor
> helps to ensure compliance with the "only one signal at a time" limit.
>
> So this new rule will result in a GENUINE M/S:  The station is operated 
> almost like a single
> op, but permits multiple operators.  Yes, there is the "crippling" effect 
> of the 8 changes
> constraint compared to a SOAB entrant, but I think that is necessary in 
> order to help to
> ensure compliance (not a M/M w/o interlocks in disguise).
>
> So now after some thought, I feel that I understand more about this 
> preliminary category.
> I still think "it won't matter" in terms of participation (entrants), but 
> at least I can see
> where Randy might be coming from.
>
> de Doug KR2Q
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest