[CQ-Contest] Need clarification from DL1MGB

[Martin , LU5DX]

Exactly Hans a diminished field of candidates, with diminished chances of
biased results, by reducing those uncontrollable factors (those that we can
reduce - at least-)
What's the point of competing in something you cannot control?
I can understand why casual contesters enter contests.But, those of us who
do it at a serious level; why do we do it with all those factors out of
possible and effective control? I can understand that we do it for fun too.
Mainly to challenge ourselves, because competition at some point is
non-sense. Starting with Geographic differences all the way up to the most
clever ways of cheating with technology or human resources.

What Germans did is effective beyond their arguments, to eliminate some of
the ways serious contesters use to cheat. To me that's the point.
WRTC turned from a great social event, into the most serious ham radio
competition in the world. Like it or not. That's a fact. Otherwise you
cannot justify the level of technological complexity developed by some
teams in Russia 2010. They were there to have fun, but also to compete (and
very seriously).

You can see the discussions around terrain profiles, that also demonstrates
that WRTCers quality fo compete and they want the most leveled playing
field possible.
This is not about likes and dislikes. It is about giving an event, a very
important event like WRTC the quality it deserves, starting with the
qualifying run.
Otherwise, it will simply be a: "...do wathever, to pretend you are doing
something serious..." when actually it doesn't have the foundation to be
that way.

Great events like CQ WW, ARRL DX, WAEDC, Russian and actually any other
contests are possible mainly because caual entrants get on the air. But in
the case of serious competitors, rules need to adapt to give competition a
meaning.

Like it or not. It is what it is. So the question is, are we here to give
the "boy and his radio" paradigm continuity in time, or are we here to
discuss how to make ham radio competition better, not in terms of quantity,
but in terms of quality.

One way or the other, at some point we will have to make a decision. If we
continue to face the other way, we can simply turn contest into QSO
parties, and results will just be an alphabetical list of stations who
entered without any reference to QSOs, mults and score.


73,

Martin LU5DX

On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 2:45 PM, Radio K0HB <kzerohb at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  The underlying notion of WRTC is to gather together on a "level playing
> field" the very best contesters from a "not level" source universe which
> contains a widely diverse spectrum of modes and styles
> (assisted/not-assisted, QRP/LP/HP, SO/MM/M1/M1/M2,SSB/CW/RTTY, etc, etc).
>
> Everyone from that "not level" universe has a chance to qualify for an
> invitation to play.  Probably not an equal chance, but a chance nonetheless.
>
> Along comes the suggestion below that the ONLY route to qualification be a
> single prescribed level path of SOAB(A) HP.
>
> So now, rather than a broadly diverse universe of candidates, we would
> have a much diminished field of candidates who will play in a contest
> category completely different from the single source category in which they
> excelled to qualify.
>
> As Cosby said --- "Riiiiiiight!!!!!!!!"
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, Dec 17, 2014 at 09:29, Martin LU5DX <lu5dx at lucg.com.ar>,
> wrote:
>
>
> Candidate WRTC ops should be forced to qualify in SOAB(A) HP.
>>
>