[CQ-Contest] NAQP - Rules Changes Needed

Sun Aug 8 20:08:32 EDT 2021

I agree with Pete's comments about adding an "Assisted" class to NAQP.  Like
Pete, I live in a gated community and no towers are allowed.  That means I
have to use "wires in the woods" and my "woods" are only about 35' tall.  I
can make up for some of that by using higher (500-600 watts) but not in
NAQP, at least if one wants to contribute their score to a team effort.
Same if one wants to do SO(A) and get pushed into an M/2 category.  So, now
I am reduced to a lot of S&P or continually fighting to beat off interlopers
on "MY" frequency.  And, I don't know if the person calling CQ is a dupe or
not until often it is too late so I find myself making more dupes than I
like or suddenly cutting my call short and hoping the guy did not figure out
who I was.  

On Sat. afternoon, I occasionally checked 10M and found several TX stations
coming through with loud signals.  But, there were only two of them that
happened to be sending when I was listening.  With SO(A) I might have known
there was some activity and maybe more people would have gone to 10M when it
was open.  Not all 10M opening occurs on the hour, you know.  

Also, Pete, you will be happy to know I miss the RBN spots, particularly the
signal reports.  That gives me a pretty good idea of how I am being heard
and where and if it makes sense to hazard calling "CQ".  Now, it is like
flying blind.  Just prior to this contest I put up several new antennas but
still have no idea of how they were working.  The RBN info would have helped
tell me that info.

I do enter calls into the n1mm band map but that is of limited use, as y'all
know.  I am also awaiting a K4 (probably in another two years at this rate).
I have not checked to see if I can turn off the pan adapter. If not, would
that push me back into M/2.  Maybe I could just tape a piece of paper over
the pan adapter but that would look pretty strange on my QRZ.com page.   

It is not like adding an SO(A) category would mean adding a bunch of
trophies.  Well, maybe one would suffice.  I could even live with not having
a trophy available.  I'm certainly not going to win it with my setup.

SO, how about it guys.  Are you SO(U) guys really that afraid that a SO(A)
op will beat you?  Maybe we should give it a couple of trials and see what
happens.

73,
Dennis, K2SX

-----Original Message-----
From: CQ-Contest <cq-contest-bounces+dbmcalpine73=gmail.com at contesting.com>
On Behalf Of cq-contest-request at contesting.com
Sent: Sunday, August 8, 2021 12:00 PM
To: cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: CQ-Contest Digest, Vol 224, Issue 6

Send CQ-Contest mailing list submissions to
	cq-contest at contesting.com

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	cq-contest-request at contesting.com

You can reach the person managing the list at
	cq-contest-owner at contesting.com

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
"Re: Contents of CQ-Contest digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. Batavia contest (ktfrog007 at aol.com)
   2. NAQP CW - Rules Changes Needed (Pete Smith N4ZR)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2021 12:03:09 +0000 (UTC)
From: ktfrog007 at aol.com
To: "cq-contest at contesting.com" <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Batavia contest
Message-ID: <739325287.100894.1628337789841 at mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

The YB Batavia FT8 contest is this UTC weekend, all 48 hours.??

I tried to help out by working a few participants, all statesiders (CQ WW),
with no luck, so I though I'd better check the rules.? I found the
following:

"QSO with same country will count for zero (0) point but still possible
count for Country or Prefixes multiplier."

This seems a poor rule, especially for a 48 hour contest with
little?activity, at least here in NA.??

Even so, with prefixes as mults, it's odd no one would work me. Must be wall
to wall AB1 stations out there.

The rule itself?is borrowed from the CQ WW rules.? Although?the CQ WW
contests are the biggest and most popular, its rules come from?1948 and are
dated, if not obsolete now.

73,
Ken, AB1J

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2021 08:21:05 -0400
From: Pete Smith N4ZR <pete.n4zr at gmail.com>
To: reflector cq-contest <CQ-Contest at Contesting.COM>
Subject: [CQ-Contest] NAQP CW - Rules Changes Needed
Message-ID: <b2fbf7cb-1a94-839d-61a4-72249c124e89 at gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed

Now that this running is behind us, the organizers need to seriously
consider a change in the rules.

It is unnecessary, and downright punitive, to push assisted single ops into
Multi-2, instead of creating a separate single op assisted category. Many of
us, with limited antennas (see HOAs) can only S&P. 
Without assistance, operating becomes a deadly boring sequence of tune,
copy, type the call in, be told it's a dupe, and repeat.

The rule now consigns assisted ops to submergence in the multi-op category,
when it would be so simple to create a single-op assisted category. It's
certainly not in the interest of expanding NAQP participation to continue
punishing assisted ops this way.? Time to act!

--
73, Pete N4ZR
Check out the new Reverse Beacon Network web server at
<http://beta.reversebeacon.net>.
For spots, please use your favorite
"retail" DX cluster.

------------------------------

Subject: Digest Footer

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

------------------------------

End of CQ-Contest Digest, Vol 224, Issue 6
******************************************