[CQ-Contest] Comments / FAQs on WRTC2018 qualification rules

[Frank Hunt]

Hi Trent, if the ZL you are referring to is meant to be me, I made 122 not 
22 valid contacts. But I was not the highest scoring Oceania entrant, that 
honour went to YE2W who operated Mixed mode. Second highest Oceania 
CW score was VK4QH.

Conditions were pretty poor last year, compared with my best year of  2010 
when I achieved my target of 250 contacts. Didn't operate in WAG this year 
because I operated in the JARTS RTTY contest instead.

73, Frank ZL2BR (ZL2B/ZM2B)


On 9 Dec 2014 at 6:23, VK4TS Trent Sampson wrote:

> These rules have some large anomalies in them - but most rules do. 
> 
> Regarding the WAG - last year's results saw a ZL the highest entrant
> from Oceania - with 22 Contacts - he would gain 1000 points in 2015.
> There are plenty more like this. 
> 
> Vlad VK2IM suggested that each regions premier contest should be
> weighted as max. 
> 
> Eg WAE for Europeans 1000 , ARRL for NA 1000, Oceania for Oceania 1000
> (regional scores only) 
> 
> True internationals like WPX IARU HF Champs 1000 - Although the rules
> have been released it is not too late to change them as the first
> round is still 2 months away. 
> 
> Contest Value 2015 2016 # of events
> 
> CQWW DX CW 1000 
> CQWW DX SSB 1000 
> CQWW WPX CW 1000 
> CQWW WPX SSB 1000
> IARU HF Championship 1000
> Russian DX Contest 1000 (Russian)800 (non Russian)
> ARRL Int. DX CW 1000(NA)800 (Non NA)
> ARRL Int. DX SSB 1000(NA)800 (Non NA) 
> WAE DX CW 1000 (EU) 800 (Non EU)
> WAE DX SSB 1000 (EU) 800 (Non EU)
> All Asian DX CW 1000 (AS) 800 (Non AS)
> All Asian DX SSB 1000 (AS) 800 (Non AS)
> EUHFC 800 X X 2 - EU only
> WAG 1000 (DL) 800 (Non DL)
> IARU R1 FD CW 1000 X X 2 - only DL
> IARU R1 FD SSB 1000 X X 2 - only DL
> Oceania 1000 (OC) 800 (Non OC)
> Ditto for other regions
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf
> Of Yuri Sent: Tuesday, 9 December 2014 2:40 AM To:
> cq-contest at contesting.com Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Comments / FAQs on
> WRTC2018 qualification rules
> 
> 
> Putting this usually endless and useless assisted/unassisted and
> single-op/multi-op discussion behind for now, can somebody answer a
> simple question - being the same time format, why IARU Contest and
> RDXC are being treated differently in regards of points? Why did the
> WRTC-2018 organizers decide that RDXC is more important than IARU
> Contest and therefore participants should earn more points for it? Not
> even talking that IARU is an unofficial World Championship and a truly
> Worldwide Contest and RDXC is more of Russian/EU Contest... From
> common sense point of view I can't find a logical answer.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Yuri  VE3DZ
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mats Strandberg" <sm6lrr at gmail.com>
> To: "Paul O'Kane" <pokane at ei5di.com>
> Cc: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Sent: 08 December, 2014 00:53
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Comments / FAQs on WRTC2018 qualification
> rules
> 
> 
> >I fully support Paul's view, summarized by his conclusion that the
> > unanimous response is poorly thought through.
> >
> > Assisted is now baked together in one big fluffy cake with
> > Unassisted to "simplify the rules and to promote the competition by
> > concentrating operators in only a few categories".  For what purpose
> > is there a need to simplify rules and concentrate competition into
> > "only a few categories"? What does the contesting community gain by
> > that decision?
> >
> > In analogy of the logic of the WRTC 2018 statement, I for sure agree
> > with Paul that QRP, LP and HP then should be considered equal in the
> > same way that Assisted and Unassisted is done. Why bother to try to
> > judge if an entry is reasonable or not. Better assume all are
> > cheating...
> >
> > So, the wish from the organizers would actually be that all WRTC
> > aspirants should preferably work only HP and only Assisted, to
> > "simplify rules and concentrate competition into only a few
> > categories...
> >
> > In case all qualification has been done using clusters, skimmers and
> > RBN, I for sure do not see the logic in prohibiting the same in the
> > real competition. This is double standards on unprecedented level.
> > Let guys play with toys they got used to.
> >
> > The WRTC 2018 organizers talk with split tongues and the logic is
> > not present at all.
> >
> > Like someone stated, it seems that this move of equalizing Assisted
> > and Non Assisted is the beginning of the last nail into the coffin
> > for traditional operating in CQWW also. After WRTC 2018, CQWW CC
> > just "realize" that all major contesters have now "matured" and
> > accepted the evolution of contesting by working Assisted.  Leave the
> > old-fashioned guys in the Classic 24 hour category and let them play
> > with their old toys and remain conservative.
> >
> > This looks like a perfectly directed movie, with a given end.
> >
> > 73 de Mats RM2D (SM6LRR)
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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