[CQ-Contest] RDXC Entry Reclassified to High Power

Mats Strandberg sm6lrr at gmail.com
Wed Oct 5 15:38:14 EDT 2016

I support Martin on this.

Regional events (we can discuss how many) will be THE ONLY  fair selection

There is too much dirty games going on in WRTC qualifications. We all know
about this. We know that not necessarily the best operators qualify.

I am for a system than 100W field day operations determine the best

To qualify with SUPER stations and with 1 kW+ power levels, is hypocrisy.

If we want the elite of the elite, then skip this qualifying system that
stimulates/promotes power cheating. Arrange 4 controlled regional field day
operations in 6 continents. Select a fixed amount of teams and bring them
all together in WRTC every 4 years. Let teams qualify, not team leaders!

How many power cheaters do we have in 2018 TL positions?  I can tell there
are MANY! That is VERY BAD for our hobby!

Let us be serious and clean the rotten fruits from the basket - and make
WRTC a doping-free competition!

73 de Mats RM2D

2016-10-05 18:55 GMT+03:00 Martin LU5DX <lu5dx at lucg.com.ar>:

> I think regional events should be held prior to each WRTC.
> Say two qualifying events. Everyone who wish to qualify would spend their
> own money to attend.
> These regional events could be organized and monitored by several local
> radio clubs.
> To me, that's the only way to get rid of all possible ways of cheating /
> avoiding the competition out there.
> Given the fact that these events are just qualifying runs, teams would use
> a simple and cheap wire antenna and simple rules (1 multiband dipole, one
> rig).
> There are certainly solutions if there is a will to change the current
> situation. However I don't see much interest in fixing this fiasco.
> 73,
> Martin LU5DX
> El 05/10/2016 a las 10:51 a.m., Igor Sokolov escribió:
>> I am not going to be on any side of the argument. But we all know that
>> power cheating exists and proliferates. It has become especially acute
>> after the introduction of the new WRTC selection rules which allowed LP
>> category compete against HP for the slot in WRTC.
>> IMHO RDXC should be commended for pioneering the battle against power
>> violations even though their attempt is not fully approved by some.
>> RDXC can be criticized for their approach but can critics offer other
>> reliable methods of fishing out power violators. I do not think that a 100%
>> reliable method exists.
>> Does it mean that contest community should not pay attention to power
>> violations? I do not think so. Otherwise, why have different power
>> categories in the rules when these rules cannot be enforced.
>> The simple solution would be to drop separation by power and have all the
>> participants compete in one power category.  But would such a radical step
>> be to the benefit of the contest community? Would it increase
>> participation? I think not.
>> Then why don't we as a community use this precedent and try to find a
>> solution? Let's work out methods of verification of power cheating that
>> would be acceptable by a majority of the participants. This will be to the
>> benefit of all the contest sponsors where  power categories exist.
>> Disclaimer: I have no relation to RDXC committee and not competing for
>> slot in WRTC. I just like the art contesting and want make better.
>> 73, Igor UA9CDC
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list