[CQ-Contest] Intended Consequences
n5ot at n5ot.com
Tue Jul 12 07:09:11 PDT 2011
So Bob, I felt certain the change was made for a reason. That would fall
under "intended consequences." I'm not sure you addressed Steve's statement
you were initially responding to, unless your point was that you made the
suggestion intending to increade your own advanrtage.
73 - Mark, N5OT
>> A similar story can be told for the CQ WPX contest, when the number of
>> hours for
>> single-op stations was changed from 30 to 36. I'll let someone else
>> explain that
>> unintended consequence.
>> 73, Steve, N2IC
> Hi everyone,
> This same discussion keeps coming up....
> First in 1996, then a big discussion in 1998 and then again in 2008;
> See my post below in 2008.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Shohet KQ2M" <kq2m at kq2m.com>
To: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2011 7:54 AM
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Intended Consequences
> N2IC wrote:
There are several other posts of mine in the archives from 1998.
> In the 1990's, N8BJQ the WPX contest Mgr. was looking for ways to increase
> I made several suggestions:
> 1) Increase the time limit from 30 to 36 hours to eliminate the HORRENDOUS
> Sunday "dead zones"
> 2) Change the US-US contact from 0 point to 1 point
> (I made several more suggestions that were not adopted)
> Operating on Sunday in the late '80's in WPX used to feel like watching
> the grass grow. Most people
> used up their operating time in the first 24 hours. It was typical was
> operate 18 hours of
> the 1st 24 and then have 6 hrs in the next 24. Result? Immense boredom
> since there
> were very few stations to work since most people were taking off-time on
> Having operated in this contest almost continually from 1975-2005, no one
> more familiar with the "Sunday dead-zone" than myself. Frankly, it sucked
> and was ruining
> a great contest!
> Fortunately N8BJQ, who also operated the contest, experienced this
> first-hand and realized
> that turning on the radio on Sunday to hear wide swaths of empty
> bandwidth, was a
> DIS-Incentive to operate in WPX! . At the time, there were
> comments from well-known contesters saying that it did not make sense for
> them to take the time
> and spend the money to travel to be DX to operate only 30 hours. Hence the
> reasons to expand the operateing time to 36 hours were compelling and 30
> to 36 hours rule change was made.
> In the following years, after the increase from 30 - 36 hour time liimit,
> activity EXPLODED!
> One needs only to look at the
> past results to see how many ops put on Dxpeditions for the WPX contest,
> to realize how important this
> change was. Likewise, one only needs to look at the exploding activity in
> this contest from Europe and
> other areas in the world, as well logs submitted, to see what a world-wide
> success WPX has become!
> (In large part thanks to the 36 hours operating limit).
> Another important change was made a not long after. The mid-West and West
> Coast ops
> and others like myself felt hat it was unfair to work US for mult credit
> and no points. I always
> thought that 0 point q's were ridiculous. They thought that they would be
> more competitive if they got 1
> point to help "level the playing field". I knew it wouldn't change the
> relative scores (and said so
> on this reflector) but I thought it would BOOST activity and help the
> NON-Northeast ops, and I so I
> strongly supported it, because it would be good for the contest! (I even
> went so far as to suggest
> IARU scoring 1 point for same zone, 2 points for same country same
> continent and 3 points for different continent).
> My thoughts then and now could be summed up this way:
> More hours operated = More activity (more q's and more mults)
> 1 points per US qso = More fun
> More activity = Higher scores
> More fun = Higher scores
> Thus, the INTENDED consequences of changing from 30 to 36 hours and
> giving 1 point for same country q's, were acheived.
> MORE ACTIVITY MORE FUN MORE LOGS SUBMITTED
> In other words, the rule changes were a HUGE SUCCESS for the WPX contests
> and for
> most of the people who enjoy operating in them.
> What SHOULD matter, is "What is best for the contest?" "What will
> increase activity in a meaningful way?"
> Imagine if the operating time in SS were only 18.75 hours out of 30 hours
> with 11.25 hours of
> off-time. (Same ratio as WPX 30 hrs out of 48)
> Would that make the Northeast more competitive? Probably - since it would
> give other favored parts of the US 5.25 less hours of higher rate than the
> NE stations - thereby
> making the scores closer. So everyone's score would be lowered but the
> "favored" areas
> would have their scores lowered even more, thereby making the Northeast
> more competitive.
> Is that a good idea? Of course not!
> Would that make much bigger and deeper "dead zones"? You bet! Not a year
> goes by without
> people complaining about how boring and slow Sunday in SS is. Now imagine
> how much lower
> the actiivty level would be on Sunday with another 5.25 hours of offtime
> added. Would that make
> it a better contest? Of course not!
> Well, that is how WPX was with a 30 hour time limit.
> Sadly, I already know that this matter will never be put to rest . But
> now we have the evidence of
> of how well these INTENDED CONSEQUENCES have worked for the past 13+ years
> and how many more
> contesters make operating in the WPX contests an annual event.
> Bob Shohet, KQ2M
> kq2m at kq2m.com
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
More information about the CQ-Contest