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

[Mark Bailey]

Respectfully, it doesn't address the competitive single operators.  We're using SO2R.

73,

Mark, KD4D

On November 19, 2020 12:30:47 PM EST, Yuri <ve3dz at rigexpert.net> wrote:
>I would vote for 36-hour Classic Category (1 radio, no assistance) in 
>both CQ WW and CQ WPX Contests. That would suit most of the
>complainers.
>Current 24-hour category I would call a "Handicap" Category.
>
>73, VE3DZ
>
>On 11/18/2020 1:07 PM, marko.n5zo at gmail.com wrote:
>> I'm sure it is impossible to make everyone happy with updated rules.
>> But what it is worth, I agree with John on time limits of Classic.
>> Classic is great category to participate when going to DX/Contest
>pedition,
>> think something like setting verticals on beach at rare multiplier
>location
>> to make contest interesting to oneself as well as all other
>participants,
>> and to mount competitive score...
>> No need to take with you whole 2nd station for SO2R.  Only one
>station, and
>> even that is plenty luggage with current airline limits.  But with
>all
>> costs, time, work to set up station somewhere interesting I would
>really
>> like to operate competitively with others in same category, not be
>limited
>> to 24 hrs.  Always feels like too much work for too little contest. 
>I
>> personally would like 48 hrs Classic category in CQ WW and 36 hrs in
>WPX.
>> Maybe there can be another 24 hrs Classic for participants who no
>longer can
>> or want to operate more than 24 hrs,
>> 73 de Marko N5ZO
>>
>> ******************************************************
>> Message: 4
>> Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 23:47:58 +0000
>> From: John Crovelli <w2gd at hotmail.com>
>> To: "cq-contest at contesting.com" <cq-contest at contesting.com>
>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Rule Changes for the CQ WW WPX SSB and CW
>> 	Contests in 2021
>> Message-ID:
>> 	
>>
><MN2PR05MB6045C548DC5CD733703178C689E30 at MN2PR05MB6045.namprd05.prod.outlook.
>> com>
>> 	
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>
>> As the result of this rule change announcement, operators who prefer
>to
>> operate without assistance are left with a single choice: 'Classic' .
>>
>> But even this entry option has been substantially modified with more
>> limitations imposed in terms of operating time and competition by
>power
>> levels.
>>
>> There are no longer both a High Power and Low Power Classic option as
>> existed previously ... now just one big 'Classic' group where the HP
>> stations will unquestionably prevail over LP entrants.  Does this
>encourage
>> competition for thousands of entrants limited to only 100 watts?  
>Why HP
>> and LP been combined together is something of a mystery since it is
>so
>> unreasonable to expect HP and LP stations to be competitive against
>one
>> another.  I hope the Committee reconsiders this part before the rules
>are
>> published, by restoring both HP and LP categories and perhaps adding
>a QRP
>> category to the Classic group as well.
>>
>> The other change in Classic rules reduces the allowed operating
>period from
>> 36 to 24 hours.  Do unassisted operators have some inherent need to
>operate
>> fewer hours?  Do they somehow benefit from 1/3 less operating time? 
>Would
>> anyone be enthused about laying out the money to go on a DXpedition
>if they
>> are limited to just half the overall 48-hour operating period?
>>
>> There is still time to do some fine tuning these rule changes.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> John Crovelli, W2GD*************
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>_______________________________________________
>CQ-Contest mailing list
>CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.