[CQ-Contest] How many hours do SOAB entrants actually operate?
Aldewey at aol.com
Aldewey at aol.com
Thu Apr 4 07:51:56 EDT 2013
As had been mentioned, this is something that has been looked as in the
past by the ARRL CAC. The issue of whether it would increase or decrease
participation was debated at length. The effect of diluting competition as
well as the costs of adding additional categories was also considered. At the
time, it was decided to make no change to the 48 hour rule for Single
Operators.
Still, I think the idea really has merit. As a single op, I absolutely
love the hours or IARU and sell as RXDX. And it was nice to see WPX cut back
on their hours for Single Op AB.
Rightly or wrongly, the way this works is for ARRL membership to bring
this suggestion up with your ARRL Director. For those of you who feel adding
a 24 hour category to ARRL DX for Single OP AB (or even replacing the 48
hour category with lesser hours), I encourage you to put pressure on your
ARRL Director to consider this change. If enough pressure is put on the ARRL
Board, it is likely the CAC will be asked to consider it again. Possibly,
the result could be different this time.
73,
Al, K0AD
In a message dated 4/4/2013 5:28:52 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
wc1m73 at gmail.com writes:
I believe a more accurate term for what Dave opposes is "Any contiguous
24",
rather than "best 24 out of 48".
The other alternative is "Any 24", which allows the op to choose whichever
24 hours he/she wishes to operate. Note that off-times must have a minimum
duration, usually 30 or 60 minutes, to make this format work.
There are arguments for and against both formats:
Contiguous-24
Pro: Requires the operator to demonstrate knowledge of propagation on all
bands and/or antenna-building expertise that includes all 6 contest bands.
It also forces low band activity, which helps to offset the worry that a
24-hour category will hurt low-band participation. It also requires
significant stamina, albeit much less than a 40+ hour effort.
Con: Requires operating for 24 hours straight, effectively an
"all-nighter",
which gets us back to the endurance and health issues. It's less friendly
in
terms of allowing operators to schedule their time to both participate in
the contest and do other things over the weekend, like run errands, do
chores, watch/attend ball games and spend time with the family --
especially
on holiday weekends.
Any-24
Pro: Requires strategy to optimize operating hours. Allows for plenty of
rest and sleep, and is schedule and family friendly -- no more fighting
over
Thanksgiving and Memorial Day weekend.
Con: Allows the op to "cherry-pick" the hours, operating only when the rate
is high. This could hurt low-band participation.
A variation on Any-24 that offsets the impact on low band participation is
to require a minimum number of operating hours between 0000z and 0900z, or
to award extra points for low-band contacts like WPX. There could be all
sorts of variations designed to spread out the operating time and bands.
We already have experience with both of these formats:
- IARU is a "Contiguous-24" contest, though you can't choose which 24. It
starts at the beginning of the high-rate openings between US and EU, which
would probably be a popular choice for start time if we had a Contiguous-24
category. IARU requires that you have a good understanding of propagation
on
all the bands and have effective antennas on them. It also requires the
ability to pull an all-nighter.
- ARRL Sweepstakes is an "Any-24" contest. Off times must be at least 30
minutes. It requires strategy to choose your operating times so that you
can
capture mults from all parts of the US and Canada. Mults count only once,
not once per band. Normally that would eliminate the incentive to operate
the low bands, but the need to work stations that are usually in the
high-band skip zones forces you to operate on the low bands.
- WPX is an "Any-36" contest with double points for low-band contacts.
Off-times must be at least 60 minutes. It requires strategy to choose your
off-times and decide when and where to work non-US for points and when to
work US for mults. Mults count only once, not once per band. So while the
double points ensure you must work 40, you don't necessarily have to work
160, 80 (in the CW contest), 10 or 15 (in low sunspot years).
With some creativity, I think it would be possible to craft rules for
24-hour categories in CQ WW and ARRL DX that would make them both
challenging and enjoyable.
73, Dick WC1M
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Gilbert [mailto:xdavid at cis-broadband.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2013 1:44 PM
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] How many hours do SOAB entrants actually
> operate?
>
>
> I have been arguing here for a 24 hour category, but I am also strongly
> opposed to "best 24 out of 48" instead of simply 24 hours max. "Best 24
> out of 48" defeats the entire intent ... it takes away the strategic
> requirement to choose your operating hours wisely, and as Joe says it
> turns it back to an iron butt contest anyway.
>
> Dave AB7E
>
>
>
> On 4/3/2013 6:26 AM, Joe wrote:
> > That I do not like tho!
> >
> > Take the "Best" is defeating the purpose of the shorter 24 hours idea.
> > If it is the best it forces the station to again operate the full 48
> > because who knows the conditions may explode sunday,
> >
> > This again makes it a big gun iron butt contest and not a true 48 hr
> > contest.
> >
> > Joe WB9SBD
> > Sig
> > The Original Rolling Ball Clock
> > Idle Tyme
> > Idle-Tyme.com
> > http://www.idle-tyme.com
> > On 4/2/2013 8:18 AM, RT Clay wrote:
> >> I am one person who might operate more if there was a 24 hour
> >> category. Right now I only operate Sprint, NAQP, IARU, and SS because
> >> those I can fit in my schedule.
> >>
> >> I would suggest that anyone operating more than 24 hours be
> >> automatically entered in the 24 category- software could easily
> >> determine the "best" 24 hour period for those entrants. If the 24
> >> hour period was chosen that way, operating MORE than 24 hours would
> >> be the best way to get a top 24-hour score.
> >> So I doubt
> >> it would decrease much the time people put it.
> >>
> >> With access to contest logs (with bad qsos removed by log checkers)
> >> it would be easy for a 3rd party to calculate the best 24 hours
> >> scores.
> >>
> >> Tor
> >> N4OGW/5
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ________________________________
> >> From: Steve London <n2icarrl at gmail.com>
> >> To: Christian Schneider <prickler.schneider at t-online.de>
> >> Cc: cq-contest at contesting.com
> >> Sent: Mon, April 1, 2013 7:16:51 PM
> >> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] How many hours do SOAB entrants actually
> >> operate?
> >>
> >> Thanks for the data, Chris.
> >>
> >> In the 24 hour RDXC, 9% operate full time (>23 hours).
> >> In the 48 hour CQWW SSB (using KR2Q data), 11.9% operate 24 hours or
> >> more.
> >>
> >> So, presented with a shorter contest, the percentage who choose to
> >> operate full time is actually less than the percentage who operate 24
> >> or more hours in a 48 hour contest.
> >>
> >> I fail to see how adding a 24 hour category to a 48 hour contest will
> >> encourage more people to operate even 24 hours.
> >>
> >> 73,
> >> Steve, N2IC
> >>
> >> On 04/01/2013 01:19 PM, Christian Schneider wrote:
> >>> N2IC wrote: How about looking at the statistics for those major
> >>> worldwide contests that are already 24 hours long, such as the IARU
> >>> HF, and Russian DX ? What percentage of participants currently
> >>> operate more than, say
> >>> 22 hours
> >>> ? I'm sure there is a reader of this list has access to that data.
> >>> Are the
> >>> "24 hour category" folks walking their talk ?
> >>> ------------------------------------
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Hi Steve,
> >>> in four RDXCs 11 to 15 percent of the SOAB operated 20 to 24 hours
> >>> with up
> >>> to 9 percent having 23:xx hours.
> >>> See http://www.dl8mbs.de/40984/45289.html
> >>> 73, Chris (DL8MBS)
> >>>
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
> >
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
More information about the CQ-Contest
mailing list