[CQ-Contest] SO (A) in ARRL 10/160

[Cqtestk4xs at aol.com]

Fewer catagories?  Nah.  We forget about the little guys  who use a 
vertical and 100W.  They cherish the third place finish single  band 10meter LP 
assisted certificate in CQWW for the fourth district.  For  us big guns its 
ZZZZZZZZZ, but to them it's important.  
 
We should all remember when those trivial certificates got the  premier 
places on our walls in the shack....all because there were lots of  categories.
 
Bill K4XS
 
 
In a message dated 11/27/2013 11:39:58 A.M. Coordinated Universal Ti,  
pokane at ei5di.com writes:

On  27/11/2013 05:15, Randy Thompson K5ZD wrote:
> It is too bad the ARRL  did not take the forward looking position and use
> this opportunity to  allow all single ops to use spotting assistance.  
These
> contests  would benefit from less categories rather than more.

And why has K5ZD  not already done the same for "his"
contest - CQWW?  It's because a  recent survey made it
clear that we, the SO entrants, didn't want  it.

The only benefit of this move would be to CQ and ARRL.
As  contest sponsors, they would be relieved of the
unwanted responsibility of  identifying which single
ops used spotting assistance from other  operators.
Wasn't that once known as Multi-Op?  :-)

Fewer  categories?  Yes, why not?  Let's take the
forward looking  position and combine power levels.
And what about "classic"  categories?   Well, it's
obvious - real men don't need time  off.

73,
Paul  EI5DI





_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest  mailing  list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest