[CQ-Contest] Are You Kidding Me??

Jeff Blaine KeepWalking188 at ac0c.com
Sat Nov 21 12:51:30 EST 2020

It's interesting the original rationale for this included references to 
the "that's how we do it in the CQ WPX RTTY version."  While that's true 
- the RTTY WPX has no separate unassisted category, I certainly wish it 
were not that way.  And a suggestion that not having the unassisted 
option there does not make any sense to me but as I came late to the 
RTTY contest party, it was that way when I arrived.

I suppose an argument could be made that it's difficult to enforce guys 
who are using assistance from those who are not may be true.  And 
contest adjudication has got to be a miserable and certainly thankless task.

But with this assistance unification logic, I guess power should be 
next.  Following the same rationale, there are surely guys claiming LP 
but running an amp.  And that's a headache to try to figure out and in 
reality given the variables they are just too hard to catch.  So we need 
to get rid of the power categories next - just to be consistent.

I certainly hope this trend of elimination of categories does not 
continue with other contests.  In fact the only way I have a chance to 
score a national win against AA3B in a RTTY contest is to run 
unassisted.  But that's fine because Bud always runs assisted and I 
prefer unassisted.  Unassisted let's me run all the time which is great 
because I'm fundamentally lazy and don't like chasing those pesky spots 
that pop up and disturb my dualing CQ syncronization!  ha ha


On 11/20/20 11:19 PM, Jim Neiger wrote:
> Bud, with all due respect, why would one operate the hours in the 
> contest that don't count?  To plan so would undoubtedly alter one's 
> strategies for the counting hours.  And sure, but with your new rules, 
> to be competitive in the 36 hours version, you need to operate with 
> assistance, i.e., have someone help copy the calls.
> For those single operators who want to make a DXpedition, and to be 
> competitive in your 36 hours version, they need a solid internet.  
> It's often hard enough just putting the competitive "radio" station 
> together on a far off  island, and now we're supposed to worry about 
> internet connections, speeds, reliability, COSTS, etc.  And this 
> add-on effort, of course, has nothing to do with amateur radio, per 
> se, nor does it demonstrate the skills that our contests are supposed 
> to measure.
> Who came up with this nauseous term "QSO alerting assistance"? Just 
> what does that mean, anyway?  Since when did we ever need assistance 
> and alerts that QSOs occurred?  At least man up and call it what it 
> is: "call sign copying assistance"
> . The contesting champions from years past,  KH6IJ, W4KFC, W9IOP, 
> W6CUF and others are surely rolling over in their graves.
> Bud, I appreciate your convictions in standing by these changes, and 
> I'm guessing that you didn't make these decisions on your own.  But 
> wouldn't it have been fair to propose these changes to your WPX 
> entrants and contesters who have lived and demonstrated a serious 
> understanding of the hobby and solicit their thoughts and ideas before 
> making such draconian changes?
> I doubt if it will change your opinions and rules, but for me, if they 
> stand as is, I will have operated my last CQ WPX.
> Good Luck and 73,
> Jim Neiger  N6TJ
> On 11/20/2020 12:03 PM, Bud Trench wrote:
>> Jim,
>> Anyone can operate the full 48 hours in WPX.  Only the first 36 hours 
>> count.  The is no penalty for exceeding the time limit of 36 hours.
>> Anyone that chooses to use the Single Op Classic Overlay can also 
>> operate the full 48 hours in WPX.  In this case, there are two 
>> independent scores:
>> Score 1 will be for the first 36 hours of operation and will be 
>> included in the Single Op results
>> Score 2 will be for the first 24 hours of operation and will be 
>> included in the Single Op Classic Overlay results
>> Both the above scores are eligible for awards.
>> Note that entries in the Single Op Classic Overlay Category are 
>> precluded from using QSO alerting assistance for the duration of the 
>> contest.
>> 73,
>> Bud AA3B
> _______________________________________________
> 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