[CQ-Contest] Rule Changes for the CQ WW WPX SSB and CW Contests in 2021

Hal Offutt hal at japancorporateresearch.com
Tue Nov 17 08:03:27 EST 2020

Every time this subject comes up here, the overwhelming response is:  
Leave the Unassisted category alone.

Why hasn't this message been received?

Why must we wake up to discover that unidentified persons have suddenly 
changed the rules we have followed for years without the slightest 
effort to check with participants?  That's not the way things are 
supposed to work in today's world.  Ever heard of stakeholders?

This contest belongs to all of us, not just to the current managers and 
whoever else happens to be on the inside now.  Yes, some of you put in 
countless hours to manage this event and produce the results and we are 
very appreciative.  But this should not give you license to change 
important rules willy-nilly.  We participants - and especially those of 
us who have been regular full-time operators - make this contest what it 
is and our opinions ought to matter.

The results of the WPX contest indicate a very clear preference for 
unassisted operating among single op entrants.  In both the SSB and CW 
weekends, a substantial majority of logs submitted by single ops have 
been in the Unassisted category every single year for the past 10 
years.  Over the past five years, 54-57% of CW single ops were 
unassisted, while for SSB the numbers were 62-63%.  Among US ops, the 
preference for Unassisted versus Assisted is even stronger.  There is 
absolutely no mandate or justification for making this change.

The points made by EI1DI (below) are spot on.  They are worth reading again.

Please reconsider this incomprehensible decision.

73, Hal W1NN

On 11/17/2020 1:54 AM, Paul O'Kane wrote:
> On 16/11/2020 15:01, Bud Trench wrote:
> <snip>
>> QSO alerting systems will now be permitted in all CQ WW WPX SSB and CW
>> Single Operator categories, except the Single Operator Classic Overlay
>> categories.
> That's a weasel way of announcing that the Single Op Unassisted 
> category has been abolished in WPX.
>> This change also results in elimination of the requirement for
>> audio recordings.
> That represents no justification whatsoever for abolishing SOU. 
> Rather, it's a consequence of abolishing SOU.
>> The drivers for combining the Single Op Assisted and
>> Unassisted categories include:
>> *    Use of QSO alerting systems by single operator participants is
>> allowed in 70% (33 or 47) of the international DX contests recently
>> reviewed, including CQ WPX RTTY
> Again, that does not justify anything.  If 70% of entries in those 47 
> contests were HP, would you use that to abolish LP and QRP? If not, 
> why not?.
>> *    It is becoming increasingly more difficult to draw the line between
>> assisted and unassisted operations as SDR technologies become more
>> integrated with contest software / networks
> Then, you really should try harder.  Is it correspondingly more 
> difficult to draw the line between HP and LP?
>> *    This step further aligns CQ WW WPX SSB / CW with CQ WW WPX RTTY.
>> The use of QSO alerting systems in CQ WW WPX RTTY has been permitted 
>> since
>> the mid-1990's
> You're aligning the SSB and CW events with RTTY.  Why not align RTTY 
> with the others, and reinstate Single OP Unassisted?
>> The Single Operator Classic Overlay categories will continue to 
>> prohibit the
>> use of QSO alerting systems and should be considered by participants
>> preferring to be unassisted.
> That is no consolation whatsoever.  Further, it limits those 
> "preferring to be unassisted" (as you quaintly put it) to 24 hours of 
> operation.
> 73,
> Paul EI5DI
> _______________________________________________
> 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