[CQ-Contest] SS Sundays

Sun Feb 10 17:21:21 EST 2013

But... the stats don't lie. Look at these log counts for the last few 
years (all I could get easily off the ARRL web site:

Year Phone    CW

2012    1675    1290
2011    1828 1404
2010    1793    1469
2009    2054 1555

Are those healthy trends?

73, Pete N4ZR
Check out the Reverse Beacon Network at
http://reversebeacon.net,
blog at reversebeacon.blogspot.com.
For spots, please go to your favorite
ARC V6 or VE7CC DX cluster node.

On 2/10/2013 3:42 PM, Ron Notarius W3WN wrote:
> I like SS for a number of reasons, and the fact that it is unique in both
> the type/length of its exchange, & that you are only allowed to work a given
> call once, make it one of the more challenging major contests.
>
> The key to increasing activity on Sundays is obvious, but it is the solution
> that requires the most effort.
>
> Consider recruiting more casual hams to operate.
>
> Consider, for example, that we are (by many reports) at or near the peak of
> the current solar cycle.  For example:  What better time to convince a Tech
> class license that this is a great opportunity to make contacts on 10 meter
> SSB?  Or on 80, 40, 15 & 10 for the CW part of the 'test?
>
> What better time to loan someone a rig, and give them a hand with an
> antenna, as incentive to put in a few hours?
>
> Or take that ham who is schlepping along to a WAS or USA-CA or similar
> award.  Especially those who believe that certain nets are the only way to
> do it.  Rather than let them believe that the bands are too "crowded",
> convince them that Sundays are prime times to work loads of people & pick up
> their state/county fills.
>
> I'm sure we can all think of more examples, but you see the point, I'm sure.
>
> The solution, IMHO, is not to change SS irrevocably.  We need more activity?
> Then let's start recruiting.
>
> Incidentally... I currently have a rig out on loan to a Tech who's one of
> the ops when I run a contest from here M/S.  It's taken a little while, but
> I believe he's ready to 'solo' on 10 meters during ARRL SSB in a few weeks
> (and more importantly, HE believes he's ready).  So it's a start.
>
> 73, ron w3wn
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Dan
> Kovatch
> Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2013 11:33 AM
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] SS Sundays
>
> I like SS just the way it is but here is a way to increase activity on
> Sunday. After you operate (or just after a time period) of 12 ,15 or 18
> (choose your time ) hours you are allowed to work the same station again ON
> ANOTHER BAND only. SO, if you worked W8CAR sat. afternoon on 40 you can work
>
> me sun. afternoon on 80,20,15 or 10 as long as you have been on for 12
> hours. Probably a nightmare for a logging programmer but it would work to
> increase activity I believe.
>
> But, that makes it a miniNAQP sort of??!
>
> Dan W8CAR
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: W0MU Mike Fatchett
> Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2013 8:59 PM
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] SS Sundays
>
> We seemed to have gotten well off the original topic which was a
> substantial drop in participation in the contest and what things we
> could do to get more people to participate.
>
> Sunday afternoon, lack of rate was mentioned as reason that discouraged
> some.
>
> I am not sure if there is any correlation between changing the length of
> the contest  and increasing participation.
>
> Mike W0MU
>
> On 2/9/2013 9:14 AM, Zack Widup wrote:
>> If you don't want to operate during the full length of the contest,
>> what does it matter what the actual length of the contest is? If you
>> only want to operate on Saturday, then do just that, etc.
>>
>> If you are in it mostly for fun (like I usually am), then you operate
>> when you wish. If you want to be competitive, you'd do whatever it
>> takes to be competitive if that means operating the maximum time
>> allowed by the rules.
>>
>> 73, Zack W9SZ
>>
>>
>> On 2/8/13, Radio K0HB <kzerohb at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Not only NO but HELL NO!
>>>
>>> Bring more players, not less operating time.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Friday, February 8, 2013, Timothy Coker wrote:
>>>
>>>> Shorten it... better for family time, less Sunday boredom, etc.
>>>>
>>>> I think this idea has something for everyone. I know a lot of the older
>>>> guys who no longer choose to stay in the chair due to ailments. I know a
>>>> number of the younger guys who choose to not stay in the chair due to
>>>> family time. The third is the shear boredom factor of a one contact per
>>>> station rule.
>>>>
>>>> I could go with the break period too... maybe two hours like NAQP? I
>>>> personally like the decision making involved with when to break. Plus we
>>>> can take a walk, sleep, eat dinner with our loved ones, etc.
>>>>
>>>> 73,
>>>>
>>>> Tim/ N6WIN.
>>>> On Feb 6, 2013 12:27 PM, "Steve London" <n2icarrl at gmail.com
>>>> <javascript:;>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 02/06/2013 11:42 AM, RT Clay wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>    Yes, the fix is simple: shorten the overall length to 24 hours. Still
>>>>>> keep a required off time of 6 hours. > The off time is important to
>>>> allow
>>>>>> stations in different parts of the country to choose the best times to
>>>>>> operate (day/night). That is particularly important for small
>>>>>> stations.
>>>>>> Choosing when to take off is also > part of SS strategy.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I could almost warm up to this. Except I would say get rid of the
>>>> required
>>>>> off time. Go 24 hours if that's what you want.
>>>>>
>>>>>    With 24 hours total the exact start time doesn't matter either as far
>>>>> as
>>>>>> propagation- it covers a full day.
>>>>>>
>>>>> 0000Z to 2359Z . That should make Sunday more interesting - it will be
>>>> the
>>>>> first opportunity for significant high band propagation, and there
>>>>> would
>>>> be
>>>>> only one night-time opportunity.
>>>>>
>>>>>    I'm sure the average qso speed in SS has gone up over the years-
>>>> computer
>>>>>> logging/etc, plus the exchange used to be longer. So it makes sense to
>>>> make
>>>>>> the whole thing shorter.
>>>>>>
>>>>> That is absolutely true. I have listened to recordings from the 1970's.
>>>>> Much slower. That was the way to pick up the hoards of newly-licensed
>>>>> General's who could barely do 13 WPM.
>>>>>
>>>>>    Yes, records get messed up. But they already get messed up every time
>>>>> a
>>>>>> new section is added.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Agreed.
>>>>>
>>>>> If SS is shortened, I could even warm up to grandfathering the old
>>>> records
>>>>> and starting new records.
>>>>>
>>>>> 73,
>>>>> Steve, N2IC
>>>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>>>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>>>>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com <javascript:;>
>>>>> http://lists.contesting.com/**mailman/listinfo/cq-contest<
>>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>>>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com <javascript:;>
>>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>>>
>>> --
>>> 73, de Hans, K0HB
>>> "Just a boy and his radio"
>>> --
>>> Sea stories at --------> http://K0HB.wordpress.com
>>> Superstition trails ---> http://OldSlowHans.com
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>