[CQ-Contest] Missing the point on SS

[Tom Haavisto]

My take on it is this:  Each contest has some unique aspects to it.  Be it
one QSO per contest (SS), everyone runs low power (NAQP), different
exchanges, etc.
These different aspects make each contest what it is.  By changing it - one
QSO per band, changing operating hours, hi band/low band, whatever - the
contest becomes *different*.
In some cases, change is needed to revive a failing contest or to address a
major shortcoming of some type.

Based on activity this past weekend, the Sweeps do not seem to be suffering
from a lack of participation, so I am not sure why folks seem to want to
change it.
Is getting a sweep hard?  Of course.  THAT is the whole point.  Getting
1,000 Q's is HARD.  Having a station that works well on both high and low
bands takes some effort and operator skill to know what sections can be
worked on what bands.  Depending on where one is located, it will be
different for folks in different sections.  THAT is part of the challenge.


Lets leave it the way it is.

*I* made a pile of QSO's on Sunday, as I am sure did others :-)


Tom - VE3CX



On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 7:01 PM, Art Boyars <artboyars at gmail.com> wrote:

> People who think that QSOs once-per-band is the right way to "fix" SS are
> missing the point.  K9MA has made it clearly: the only-once format gives
> smaller stations (myself) a chance to be not so far behind the bigger
> stations.  Operator skill (and experience) can overcome some of the
> hardware advantage.
>
> If you make it a once-per-band contest then it will just be NAQP with a
> longer exchange (but only the QSO NR will change after the first band, so
> your software will fill in the rest for you); and you are edging toward the
> Sprint contests: loudest 100 guys see who can work each other the most
> times in four hours.
>
> It would be no fun for us little guys, and I think we would not
> participate, except maybe as occasional "fresh meat", so the serious
> competitors would have to fight each other to work us :>)
>
> N0AX made the other point:  It's  >>supposed<< to be hard.  It's just a
> different kind of hard than seeing who can point-and-click the fastest.
> (Oh, you are "unlimited"?  Try turning off the spots and twirling the big
> knob while you hunt for new QSOs and mult's. It's a blast!)
>
> 73, Art K3KU
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>