[CQ-Contest] What is Multi to you?

[W0MU Mike Fatchett]

If this was Nascar what would be happening is that most of us would have 
one car in the race.  The super stations have 8 or 6 or 4.  The rules 
should reflect how the vast majority operate not be written for the few.

W0MU


On 5/10/2017 7:02 AM, Gerry Hull wrote:
> Hi Yuri,
>
> No offense taken.
>
> Take the NASCAR analogy.   Yes, I expect people to push the rules -- like
> they do in car racing.   When they found certain techniques were causing
> completely out-of-bound results, they reigned in the rules.
>
> My point of view is yes, an 8-station M/S certainly is advancing the state
> of the technology art -- and I have no problem with the people doing it, in
> fact I'm in awe from the technology perspective..  However, what is it
> doing for contesting overall?   Maybe I'm a bit too altruistic.    If the
> three or four stations worldwide who use this technique dominate M/S for
> many years to come, what have they proven?   That they can win by pushing
> the rules to the absolute limit.  There is inherently nothing wrong with
> that -- that is part of what competition is.
>
> What does it do to participation in the category is another question
> completely.
>
> I can argue the same point about remote:  So far, in general, it have
> proven a challenge to generate the same level of scores from a remote as
> you can from being on location.  As skills and technology improve, I think
> you will see this change.  The ability to put rare multipliers on, and, the
> ability of contesters to come back into the fold (who are QRT in
> covenant-restricted QTHs), I would argue, has huge benefit to all the in
> the contest community.  Just ask a lot of contesters in southern California
> or Florida.
>
> The purpose of this reflector, hopefully, other than a bitch session, is to
> express ideas.  Let's continue the discussion.
>
> Yuri, we can talk about it more over a beer in Dayton...
>
> 73, Gerry W1VE
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 8:31 AM, Yuri <ve3dz at rigexpert.net> wrote:
>
>> Gerry, I understood your point.
>> Please don't take it as an offence.
>> Just look at it from this angle:
>> There are RULES in the Contest, and serious contesters study rules, find
>> the way how to use technology to advance the score without breaking the
>> rules and then do a great deal of technological, intellectual and financial
>> investments into realizing their ideas...
>> And then someone who don't (or can't) do the same start to complaining.
>> At least that's how it looks sometimes (again, no offence!).
>>
>> Isn't is the same with the idea of remote contesting, the idea which you
>> really love and support?
>>
>> I don't know what needs to be done to attract more competitors to the M/S
>> category... Maybe creating a new sub-category, something like "Classic",
>> just for M/S, would help?
>>
>> Yuri
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
>> Gerry Hull
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 9, 2017 9:29 PM
>> To: Ria Jairam
>> Cc: CQ-Contest; Yuri
>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] What is Multi to you?
>>
>> If you think I'm complaining, I'm not.  You've missed my point.  I don't
>> give a hoot -- I enjoy the game, and finishing behind those 8-station guys
>> in M/S is just fine with me.
>>
>> It just keeps eliminating more and more people from the game.  Exactly
>> what we don't want.  That's my only worry.
>>
>> 73, Gerry W1VE
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 9:20 PM, Ria Jairam <rjairam at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Why all this complaining I wonder? We have stations griping about how
>>> it's not "fair" and how people have "too many advantages."
>>>
>>> Guess what - life is not fair!!! In sports the bigger, stronger,
>>> faster one will win. In radio sport the big guns closer to
>>> advantageous areas and who can do SO2R will win. That's just how it
>>> is. If you're out west and tired of being beaten, then come pay the
>>> high taxes and enjoy the harsh winters out east. Or maybe pay a remote
>>> service and use one of their stations in Maine or New York and win a
>> plaque. Turn key plug and play.
>>> Meaningless in my eyes (YOU didn't build that), but if you're so badly
>>> after a plaque that is one way.
>>>
>>> I have a single tower station with one radio and one amp. I do fairly
>>> well. I win the district sometimes and even squeak my way into the top
>>> 10 sometimes. I'm happy with that, but I could improve and do better
>>> in the placement. But let's be honest. Someone could dump a ton of
>>> money and build a multi tower station complete with low band 4
>>> squares. They'll beat me. Is that fair? Maybe it isn't. But I'm not
>>> going to knee cap them because I want to win. I just deal with it.
>>>
>>> Ria
>>> N2RJ
>>> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 7:57 PM Gerry Hull <gerry at yccc.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have no problem with Dual CQ SO2R, Yuri. These are great advances
>>>> in technique and show excellent operator skill and innovation.
>>>>
>>>> Time Division Multiplexing 8 operators and radios to a "single"
>>>> radio, IMHO, is not the same thing and is not in the spirit of the
>>>> rules.  It is simply a technology technique which is within the
>>>> letter of the rules, but not the spirit.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I have to accept it if the rules may not change.  I DO accept it...
>>>> However, I don't think it is a good way to encourage new M/S teams to
>>>> participate.
>>>>
>>>> We all have our opinions, these are mine.
>>>>
>>>> 73, Gerry W1VE
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 6:14 PM, Yuri <ve3dz at rigexpert.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Gerry,
>>>>> Isn't  SO2R Dual CQ operation (a-la CT1BOH, N6MJ etc.) is the same
>>>>> type
>>>> of
>>>>> <quote> "elimination of a lot of people from ever being in
>>>>> contention
>>>> for
>>>>> top spots in the category" <unquote>?
>>>>> All that you said below is true for ANY category.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think it's all about the rules.
>>>>> If they aren't broken and they allow to do such, then... one either
>>>> needs
>>>>> to change the rules or has to accept the fact.  Maybe it's time to
>>>> research
>>>>> some other ways to attract (more) new competitors, like doing more
>>>>> WRTC-style (live) competitions during June FDays, working more
>>>>> closely
>>>> with
>>>>> schools, colleges and other youth organizations and so on...
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>> Yuri VE3DZ
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On
>>>>> Behalf
>>>> Of
>>>>> Gerry Hull
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 9, 2017 10:28 AM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] What is Multi to you?
>>>>>
>>>>> Interesting Thread.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've been contesting over 40 years.  In all that time, 99% of my
>>>>> efforts have been at M/S or M/2 stations.
>>>>> For more than 30 of those years, a multi-single was a station with
>>>>> one main radio and one multiplier radio.
>>>>>
>>>>> With a single tower and a good antenna complement, winning M/S in
>>>>> North America has been possible with two radios.  We did it at more
>>>>> than one station.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you read my comments on CQ Contest, you know that I don't live
>>>>> in the past -- I love technology, and advancing the state of the
>>>>> art is where
>>>> I'm
>>>>> at.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, in this case, I think the case of N radios in a M/S is a
>>>>> bastardization of M/S.  Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
>>>>> I applaud the Huge M/S multi-radio efforts by K1LZ and others --
>>>>> very
>>>> cool
>>>>> technology -- but all that does is eliminate a lot of people from
>>>>> ever being in contention for top spots in the category.  If you
>>>>> look at the
>>>> size
>>>>> of the scores in these 5-to-10 radio Multi-singles, they are
>>>>> completely
>>>> out
>>>>> of line with "traditional" multi-singles.
>>>>>
>>>>> In CQWW, there used to be a category for "experimental" operations ...
>>>>> I'm sure those guys building those huge M/S operations would not
>>>>> accept being put in to such a category...  However, how do we
>>>>> encourage new stations, and long-time "traditional" M/S stations to
>>>>> compete in the category?
>>>>>   Since there are not a HUGE number of these Many-TX-interlocked
>>>>> M/S, and they love to one-up each other -- why not let them compete
>>>>> in a
>>>> category of
>>>>> their own?
>>>>>
>>>>> There's lots of technology/technique happening in the M/S space
>>>>> without going to such extremes.
>>>>>
>>>>> 73,
>>>>>
>>>>> Gerry W1VE
>>>>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest