[CQ-Contest] Classic - Doing what was intended?

[Pete Smith N4ZR]

Ed, I think it's extremely premature for you to attack the idea so early 
on.  A decade ago, when a few of us started to advocate the 
establishment of this category, we ran a survey asking (on 
contesting.com) whether people would operate more, less or be unaffected 
if such a category were available.  At that time, IIRC, something better 
than 3:1 said they would operate more rather than less.

What the impact may actually have been will require analysis of log 
data, and will probably require more than one year's experience to 
judge.  Was I surprised to see a few of those calls?  You bet.  Does it 
mean a negative effect?  Hardly.

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 11/28/2013 2:16 PM, Edward Sawyer wrote:
> After seeing literally more than a dozen well known contesters in each mode
> "opt down" for the 24 hours of Classic and others commenting they may try it
> next year, I have to ask - is it doing what was intended?  Seems to be a
> nice choice for those who feel inclined at the moment but taking 40+ hour
> contesters down to 24 hours is not "helping contesting" necessarily, folks.
> Maybe there are lots of people "opting up" to 24 hours who used to do 10 or
> 15 hours, I don't know.  But it does not seem to be "achieving expectations"
> collectively, from where I sit. Maybe the positive results are just not
> obvious.
>
>   
>
> 73
>
>   
>
> Ed   N1UR
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>