[CQ-Contest] [FCG] CQ WW Rules and SCP
Pete Smith N4ZR
n4zr at contesting.com
Tue Jun 25 06:19:11 EDT 2013
Hi Hans - it is in the Overlay category, like Rookies. One radio, no
spotting assistance. 24 hours total time. Breaks are a minimum of one hour.
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 6/24/2013 10:36 PM, Hans Brakob wrote:
> Point me to the info on "24 Hour Classic"
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 7:47 PM, Pete Smith N4ZR <n4zr at contesting.com
> <mailto:n4zr at contesting.com>> wrote:
>
> Too bad you feel that way, Hans - why not join me in the 24-hour
> Classic
> category, where us amateurs can have a lot of fun and maybe even
> win a
> plaque.
>
> 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 6/24/2013 10:53 AM, Hans Brakob wrote:
> > "Much of the discussion about the recent CQWW rule changes have
> been by casual ops trying to understand what some of the "pro
> level" rules mean and their impact. The CQWW rules will be set
> within a week and then we go on with discussion about other minutiae."
> >
> >
> > Steve, we are dismissed. There are "pro" rules and amateur
> rules, and to us amateurs, it's merely minutiae.
> >
> >
> >
> > You're right, by the way. You'll still here me playing
> exuberantly (to steal a phrase from K1ZZ) but my last log has
> already arrived at CQWW, just like my last subscription check went
> to Rich Mosesen a few years back.
> >
> >
> >
> > 73, de Hans, K0HB
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 8:23, Randy Thompson K5ZD
> <k5zd at charter.net="mailto:k5zd at charter.net">> wrote:
> > Contests have many levels of interest all running on the same
> course. The guys at the top are serious, passionate, and always
> pushing the rules. The more casual ops are just in it to have fun.
> >
> > The art for the contest sponsor is to balance the needs of both
> groups. I.e., make rules that define where the boundaries are, but
> not so complex that it puts off the casual entrants.
> >
> > Much of the discussion about the recent CQWW rule changes have
> been by casual ops trying to understand what some of the "pro
> level" rules mean and their impact. The CQWW rules will be set
> within a week and then we go on with discussion about other minutiae.
> >
> > The spirit of the rules is pretty simple. Work people and have
> fun. Always try view the contest rules through that lens first.
> >
> > Randy K5ZD
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On
> Behalf Of
> >> steve.root at culligan4water.com
> >> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2013 2:05 AM
> >> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> >> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] [FCG] CQ WW Rules and SCP
> >>
> >> We are inexorably moving closer to the day when this becomes more
> >> trouble than it's worth. Some of the ideas recently presented
> to "fix"
> >> contesting are fairly dramatic. Why in the world would 99% of the
> >> participants agree to to all that trouble? Face it, in any
> given contest
> >> how many of us are really competing anyway? 15, 20 guys? We're
> >> participating and that's about it. Yes, you can "compete"
> against your
> >> friends or against yourself but you don't have to follow any
> body's rules
> >> to do that. I can see the day soon when we ignore the "rules", stop
> >> reporting scores, and stop sending in logs. Get on and enjoy the
> >> activity, work a bunch of people, and then when you're done
> shut it off
> >> and walk away. And if some contest sponsor wants to sift
> through an SDR
> >> recording of a major contest and try to dredge my signal out of
> the muck
> >> to decide whether I sent an extra dit in a guys call, I won't
> be very
> >> worried about it.
> >>
> >> 73 Steve K0SR
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Hans Brakob [mailto:kzerohb at gmail.com]
> >> Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2013 04:15 PM
> >> To: 'Jack Haverty.'
> >> Cc: 'Steve Sacco NN4X', cq-contest at contesting.com
> >> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] [FCG] CQ WW Rules and SCP
> >>
> >> Hold it! TIME OUT!Third party referees in the cloud? UN
> observers in blue
> >> construction hard hats sent to selected toy radio stations to
> monitor for
> >> weapons of mass obstruction? Massive broadband receivers in the
> heavens
> >> recording the movement of every whisper of RF between Dc and
> daylight?
> >> Have we come to that?Let's cut down through all the inflated
> egotistical
> >> importance of this hobby pastime and examine what we're really
> doing on
> >> those long radio weekends.It really is no more complicated (nor
> >> important) than this.A bunch of boys and girls turn on their
> amateur
> >> radio toys and try to talk to all of each other (or at least
> most of each
> >> other) before they fall asleep, or the GMT clock strikes
> midnight. They
> >> keep a record as they go, and then send that record in to be
> compared
> >> with all the other boys and girls records. He/she with the most
> clicks
> >> wins.How about we just simplify the rules to that, and leave
> all the big-
> >> brother-in-the-cloud paranoia tasking to the NSA.73, es GL in the
> >> Contest,de Hans, K0HB/4ID
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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