[CQ-Contest] Club/Group competition 275 km radius in CQ Contest (petition for change).

Fri Apr 8 13:16:49 PDT 2011

I disagree in principle with some of these points.

The whole point, I thought, of keeping the "cluster users" apart from the "non-cluser users" (I am not going to get into another pointless debate on the word Assisted vs. the class Assisted, or of the cluster vs. the RBN system) was to let those who do use it, and those who don't, compete on an even playing field.  So our solution to those who use the cluster and claim not to is... not catch them, but not bother trying?  And if, as so many claim, the cluster users have an advantage, thereby give a disadvantage to those honest enough to not use the cluster and do the "work" of finding mults and stations on their own?  This makes sense?

Regarding recording... how are you going to record an entire contest?  Software?  Hardware?  Who pays for either or both, if needed?  Who provides me a heftier PC if mine can't handle it?  What format?  Who stores it and for how long?  Even if the software is "free" there are still costs involved.  And to be blunt, if and when I'm going to invest in my station, it's antennas and coax first, transceivers and related equipment second, and then everything else.  After all, I thought that was the whole point in a contest... showing your skills in assembling and operating a station. 

And frankly, I am disappointed at the perceived notion that if I wish to be a "serious" competitor, my honesty and ethics are impugned.  Yes, I know that there are cheaters out there.  But I find this notion distasteful in the least, to say nothing of insulting, that if I am "serious" I must prove that I am not a cheater.  If most "serious" operators are so concerned, and more importantly so paranoid, that they assume from the start that the competition MUST be cheating and therefore are presumed Guilty until they jump through hoops until the prove their innocense... we have a bigger problem on our hands than cheating, a problem that rules changes are not going to cure.

73

Apr 8, 2011 03:46:37 PM, lu5dx at mail.ru wrote:

Dear Oms!

I simply love the five points you presented!!

The reduction of the deadline is a must.
The fusion of the assisted-non assited is also a must to eliminate another
possibility of cheating. (people not liking the use of cluster will still of
course be able not to use it)
The recording of the whole constest also a must for anyone considering a
serious effort.
Logs open inmediately after sumbission.

We know every single member of the CQ WW Contest committe and not only we
know them, we also admire them for their activities and efforts on the air
throughout the years and for helping conduct CQ WW generously devoting lots
of precious hours of their time. It would be nice to see the dynamics in the
evolution of the rules follow the times we live nowadays.

We are considering sending a letter of intention to the organizers of the
five main CQ Contests (CQ WW DX, CQ WPX, CQ WW RTTY CQ WWPX RTTY and CQ
160).

The idea is for the GADX, BCC, WWYC, DXXE, CECG, VK and ZL clubs and groups,
and of course many other club that are impacted by this limitation, is
welcome to collect the name and callsing of their members who want to sing
the letter of intention and send it to the contest directors, I know in
advance we will collect a few thousand signatures for that letter.

Hope that letter means enough to the organizers to change the rule one and
for good.

I will contact you directly to give you the details

Thanks as always for your continuous support.

Best 73!!

Martin, Lu5dx

PS: In fact the 275 km rule was discussed back in WRTC2000 with one of the
contest directors, you were there and the day after that, we enjoyed a lunch
you invited us to at that little beautiful restaurant in Bled... Vila
Presera (was it the name?) Beautiful memories!

On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 8:13 AM, py5eg wrote:

> Hi Folks
>
> I'm contester for the last 50 years and one of the founders of Araucaria Dx
> Group.
> Brazil is a country with more than 8 millions Km2 with no more than a total
> of 30.000 Hams and only a small portion of that active on HF.
> Our GADX has now 30 years 300 members and we are proud to have members in
> all 5 Continents.
> I have three contest stations; one in São Paulo area, Araraquara PS2T, one
> in Curitiba ZW5B and in Florianopolis PT5T, and in addition to that other
> members owns around 10 large and medium size contest stations. Please take
> in account that those three stations are placed in a radio of 700 Km.
> The rule for 275 Km maybe could be applicable for highly ham populate
> countries but it has no sense at all for a vast majority of countries around
> the World.
> We contest organizers should stimulate the young generation to our hobby
> and well organize clubs and not create barriers.
> This does not mean that small groups should not be stimulated. Yes a great
> number of GADX members apply their logs for small local contest groups, and
> this is nice for our hobby.
> I kindly ask the friends who have a different view, to imagine how could a
> contest group placed in Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, Australia, large
> countries in Africa among others, to be competitive against groups placed in
> US, Europe, or other highly ham populated area.
> I already made an open disclosure of my position in CQWW Advisory Committee
> where I was a member for 20 years and also to the majority of the contest
> organizers, and all of them, no exception agrees that something must be
> done, but unfortunately no action.
> It is a shame, in my opinion, that we still on most important contests,
> showing no movement to change and/or develop the following aspects:
>
> 1) This ridiculous general limitation for clubs radius.
> 2) Considering the technology of today why 30 days to submit logs-
> incentive to cheat?
> 3) Official results in almost a year ????
> 4) Why not open logs immediately after the submission period. i.e 72 hours
> 5) Why not some requirements for top 5 competitors as the Russian are
> doing now? - Why not the entire contest recorded for those who are playing
> for top 5 or records.
>
> It is time for innovation and we must follow the wave.
>
> Congratulation Marti for bringing up again this important subject for an
> open discussion.
>
> Best regards
> Oms
>
> PY5EG / PP5EG / PY2OMS
> ZW5B, PS2T, PT5T, ZX0F
>
>
>
> -----Mensagem original-----
> De: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com [mailto:
> cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] Em nome de Martin Monsalvo, LU5DX
> Enviada em: quinta-feira, 7 de abril de 2011 23:12
> Para: Joe
> Cc: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Assunto: Re: [CQ-Contest] Club/Group competition 275 km radius in CQ
> Contest (petition for change).
>
> Yeah Joe pretty opposite to what we propose, but of course is your point of
> view.
> With al due respect.
> If you were the contest organizer you would probably loose support from a
> few thousand or regular entrants and your contest would probably loose
> interest and popularity.
> Perhaps if you were the organizer as you say you are always on the minority
> on most topics that would be your objective.
> O'course we want more members in our club and that's why we work so hard to
> encourage new hams to enter CQ contests and submit their logs. But not only
> that, we want them to be more involved in tech stuff, operating techniques
> and thus, to be able to enjoy more and more Qs during contest weekends.
> Similar things are happening in Chile and Uruguay where you guys had to
> struggle fo find a CQ Zone 12 or CX mult years ago and now have many
> stations available from those locations, without trying to sound to proud
> of
> ourselves (and I'm talking about several different groups), that's the
> result of years of hard work, motivation, providing info and helping in
> whatever we can to people that live in interior provinces, with few
> resources and lots of difficulties. Even though they love the hobby, they
> want to participate and they want to contribute to their club scores, even
> if they had not had the chance to have been born in New England, or
> California.
> Saying "hey go get more members" in certain countries means "go make more
> hams" and that involves economics and other circumstances that go far
> beyond
> your simplistic suggestions.
>
> Don't think you need a flame suit though. The lack of perspective is
> something hard to overcome and rever, and certainly the flames won't even
> help!
>
> Regards.
>
> Martin, LU5DX
>
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 10:37 AM, Joe wrote:
>
> > I'm probably going to be in the minority on this as I have been on most
> > other topics like this.
> >
> > But I think in exactly the opposite direction. I feel the circle is ten
> > times TOO BIG right now! I do not feel that two people over 500 miles
> > apart are in the same club.
> >
> > A club is a group of people that often meet Like at a monthly meeting.
> > An organization yes can have members 1000's of miles apart. But a club
> > is a "Local" thing. A Club is something you would be willing to drive
> > to a meeting once a month to actually meet the other members of the club.
> >
> > I don't know many clubs that have members driving 200+ miles to go to a
> > monthly meeting.
> >
> > I'd like the circle to be actually reduced to like a 25 mile radius.
> > Thats a "Club" sized circle.
> >
> > If ya want more members in your club get more in the club. simple.
> >
> > But I'll put my flame suit on now.
> >
> > Joe WB9SBD
> >
> > The Original Rolling Ball Clock
> > Idle Tyme
> > Idle-Tyme.com
> > http://www.idle-tyme.com
> >
> > On 4/6/2011 4:16 PM, Martin Monsalvo, LU5DX wrote:
> > > Hi guys.
> > >
> > > We started a petition to ask the organizers of CQ Contest to review the
> > 275
> > > Km radius rule (Club/Group) competition.
> > > We have been allowed by the organizers to submit our contest scores to
> > our
> > > clubs/groups for eleven years now, but we really feel it is time for a
> > > change.
> > >
> > > This rule was originally written back in 1948 when these competitions
> > > started and certainly the wording took into account the situation of
> the
> > US
> > > based Clubs.
> > >
> > > There are countries outside USA and Europe where the territory is
> really
> > > vast and the ham population is very little. Our members feel encouraged
> > to
> > > enter contests even if it is ocassionally if they are allowed to submit
> > > their scores to our Club/Groups, and we really believe that being these
> > > competitions world wide events, the situation of other regions needs to
> > be
> > > considered.
> > >
> > > There are several options e.g.:
> > > Remove the geographic limitation completely, thus, allowing members of
> > each
> > > Club to submit their scores to their club, no matter if they have moved
> > > temporarily or permanently.
> > > Keep this geographic limitation as it is for the US and Western Europe
> > > countries and remove it for the rest of the world, and so on.
> > >
> > > If you feel like signing the petition you can do so at:
> > > http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/275km/
> > >
> > > Thanks in advance for getting involved.
> > >
> > >
> > > Regards!
> > >
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Martin Monsalvo, LU5DX
> lu5dx at mail.ru
> http://rurls.ru/lu5dx
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>

-- 
Martin Monsalvo, LU5DX
lu5dx at mail.ru
http://rurls.ru/lu5dx
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest