[CQ-Contest] Fwd: WRTC 18 Qualifying

[K8MR via CQ-Contest]

The point we Yanks are trying to make is that for us, the ARRL DX test is a 
 more active, more competitive contest than is the RDXC. 
 
I appreciate that for much of EU, the opposite is true.
 
Which is why it makes sense to give full WRTC qualifying value to W/VE (and 
 maybe the rest of NA). It would not necessary to have ARRL as a fully 
valued  contest for those in EU, Asia, etc.
 
To look at another way, it is crazy for us in the USA to have the ARRL  DX 
and All Asia DX contests count the same.
 
 
73  -  Jim   K8MR
 
 
 
 
 
 
In a message dated 12/8/2014 3:10:48 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
sm6lrr at gmail.com writes:

ARRL  used to be an exciting contest when US casual activity was higher  and
conditions better to Europe (I do not mean EI, F and G). We talk back  in
1980 and 1990. Nowdays, the casual activity from the US makes Run  from
Europe and Asia very limited, except for the biggest guns.

As  Igor UA9CDC pointed out, ARRL can be a very sleepy exercise for stations
in  North Europe, the Baltics, European and Asiatic Russia.  No rates,  too
few North American stations in S&P mode, just the big US guns  running.

I have been operating RDXC three times seriously from SK3W in  the past 5-6
years (M2) and RDXC is far more interesting than IARU, with  better activity
in Europe and Asia for sure. Rates are good, complexity in  exchanges
challenging enough, Actually a lot more exciting than  exchanging
predictable ITU zones and HQ multipliers.

One can always  debate if RDXC should have more points than IARU, and I
think noone would  be disappointed if it had 950 (same as IARU), but now
German organizers  determined that RDXC is competitive enough to motivate 50
more points than  IARU. As simple as that. They decide.

To compare ARRL with RDXC for  those who seriously have worked both contests
is hard. Rates in ARRL are  for sure excellent for Caribbean stations
working North America, and for a  few other big guns located in nice
locations in North Africa and the very  western part of Europe. But for us
others, ARRL is certainly a contest that  should not have the same amount of
points as a worldwide contest like RDXC.  That some nations for some reasons
have not shown interest in RDXC as   WW contest is another cup of tea... For
me as a European, I definitely rate  RDXC as one of the most challenging and
most interesting WW contests. More  interesting than WPX where basicaly
every unique station is a mult.  However, I miss American participation and
that is why yagis rather point  east than west. If US activity was higher,
be sure people would turn  antennas that way in RDXC.

I think the question that really is  important, despite what Yury VE3DZ
said... is if Assisted and Non Assisted  should be awarded equally.  And few
seem to realize that this has  implications of future contesting with a much
higher importance than 50  points more or less for RDXC. What amazes me is
that top contesters claim  that discussion "endless and useless". It
certainly is everything but  useless in my understanding.

73 de Mats SM6LRR  (RM2D)



2014-12-08 19:28 GMT+03:00 Igor Sokolov  <ua9cdc at gmail.com>:

> Dave,
> In comparison of ARRL vs  RDXC as contests suitable for selection, there 
is
> one more important  point.
> RDXC is world wide, mixed mode 24 hour contest  and  therefore mimics IARU
> much better then ARRL where the world works  US/VE only for 48 hours and
> only on one mode.
> Besides RDXC is  much higher rate contest when compared to ARRL.
> I think the choice of  the organizers was absolutely correct.
>
> 73, Igor  UA9CDC
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Siddall"  <hhamwv at gmail.com>
> To: <wrtc2018 at lists.wrtc2018.de>;  <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Cc: "Igor Sokolov"  <ua9cdc at gmail.com>
> Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 6:19  PM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Fwd: WRTC 18  Qualifying
>
>
>  Igor,
>>
>> The  submitted logs demonstrate that RDXC is VERY competitive for RU
>>  stations and ARRL is VERY competitive for U.S. stations, but much less  
so
>> outside their respective countries notwithstanding rules  differences.
>> That's precisely why they should have been treated as  equivalents
>> notwithstanding that ARRL draws 30 percent more logs  than RDXC. In 2014,
>> RDXC 3193, ARRL 4156 logs (average  CW/SSB).
>>
>> They both are well-run and fun contests, but  not matches for the truly
>> worldwide competition that CQWW &  CQWPX draw; and IARU is, after all, 
the
>> foundation contest for  WRTC, maybe competitors should demonstrate 
mastery
>> of the summer  propagation conditions that they will face during the WRTC
>>  itself.
>>
>> But that now is history.  WRTC2018  elected not to reconsider their 
rules,
>> so enjoy and see you on the  bands.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Dave  K3ZJ
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at  12:12 AM, Igor Sokolov <ua9cdc at gmail.com>  wrote:
>>
>>  Dave,
>>> Can you support  your statement regarding the number of participants in
>>> RDXC,  IARU and WPX with solid figures?
>>> ARRL, that was part of 2014  WRTYC selection, for me is truly regional
>>> contest where unlike  RDXC we can only work US and VE and therefore 
pretty
>>> dull from  areas where propagation to NA last only few hours. In RDXC 
you
>>>  can work any one anywhere wich does not  fit the discription of  a
>>> regional
>>> contest but rather WW  contest.
>>> I have done ARRL couple of times from the very well  equipped setup with
>>> multiple stacks to only make 500-600 QSOs  in 48 hours while 3000 QSO in
>>> 24
>>> hours in RDXC  is not uncommon from almost anywhere.
>>>
>>> 73, Igor  UA9CDC