[CQ-Contest] Contest Teams

[Ward Silver]

Whatever the team theme/rules, all on-the-air behavior and all submitted 
QSO data must to comply with the sponsor's contest rules for the 
exchange and so forth.  Messing up the sponsor's processes would be a 
Bad Thing and very unwelcome.

Perhaps a self-assigned identifier following the call that complies with 
all regulations about prefixes would serve to identify the team without 
corrupting the sponsor's scoring and checking process.  For example, 
maybe add /T### that would be ignored by the prefix-parsing software in 
favor of the initial prefix (kind of like /P is ignored).  ### would be 
a three-digit team ID, maybe.

Scoring could be done on a post-processing basis from the verified logs 
but the sponsor would not be responsible for judging the CWAC (contest 
within a contest).

If the operation violates some criteria such as the 
all-equipment-within-a-certain-radius rule, logs should be submitted as 
checklogs.

 > What a strategy fest this would be!

Exactly.  Like adding another dimension to the chess board.

73, Ward N0AX

On 12/6/2013 8:41 AM, Gerry Hull wrote:
> Like the theme, Ward...
>
> How about this as an outside-the-box simple example of a new contest:
>
>  -Form inter-continental virtual teams
>  -intra-team QSOs count zero points
>  -rest of scoring matches a current contest type (like Zn/Cty)
>  -Exchange would include a team acronym to conform to rules.
>
> What a strategy fest this would be!  First, finding the proper
> team members on each continent; which team combinations
> would work best based on propagation, etc.   Each continent
> has it's own advantages based on TOD and population centers;
>
> This could work well if teams were made up of stations in the same
> category.
>
> Food for thought.
>
> 73, Gerry W1VE
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Ward Silver <hwardsil at gmail.com 
> <mailto:hwardsil at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Opening up the team competition to be more than just combining
>     scores would be very interesting.  The software to allow multiple
>     stations to interact as a "distributed multi-multi" already
>     exists. Remote multi-operator stations are already
>     straightforward, if not easy, as the K4VV team has demonstrated.
>      So the idea of multiple operators using multiple stations is
>     certainly do-able, although with the demise of the WW X-treme
>     category, such operation does not have a "home" in any major
>     contest at the moment.
>
>     Here are some possible team scenarios:
>
>     1) Multiple operators using one station via remote links, ala K4VV.
>     2) Multiple independent stations networked together for logging,
>     ala many IARU HQ operations
>     3) Multiple stations with a single operator using remote control
>     and networked together
>         3a) All stations are single-band throughout the contest
>         3b) All stations are multi-band but the team is limited to one
>     signal per band
>         3c) Combination of single- and multi-band stations plus
>     multiplier stations
>     4) Receive-only stations added in "partner mode" over the network
>     to support transmitting station
>
>     I'm sure this inventive audience will think of many more ways to
>     combine multiple operators and multiple stations :-)  Deciding on
>     strategies would be challenging - do you optimize by station
>     capability, by operator capability, how do you allocate time slots
>     between operators and stations, etc etc etc.  I mean, really,
>     we've been playing essentially the same game for upwards of 80
>     years. Surely there are other useful ways of competing.
>
>     On the second question - why don't we ask them?  I completely
>     agree that what they come up with would be unlikely to look all
>     that familiar but it would probably be fun.  As long as the
>     resulting activity advances radio know-how and operating skill,
>     why not?
>
>     73, Ward N0AX
>
>     On 12/3/2013 11:00 AM, cq-contest-request at contesting.com
>     <mailto:cq-contest-request at contesting.com> wrote:
>
>         > Or thinking of a team situation, what if you were in a team
>         of six, one on
>         >each continent, in say a 24 hour contest using traditional
>         scoring but you
>         >could only operate 4 hours each.  Using instant messaging or
>         voice chat to
>         >co-ordinate your plans, what tactics would you employ?  Would
>         that be fun
>         >to try?  Who knows you may even make new friends.
>         >
>         > (snip)
>         >
>         >Finally as someone else said how would a bunch of gamers
>         design a radio
>         >contest?  I suspect quite differently to what we have now.
>         >
>         >73
>         >Mark ZL3AB
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     CQ-Contest mailing list
>     CQ-Contest at contesting.com <mailto:CQ-Contest at contesting.com>
>     http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>