[CQ-Contest] NAQP CW - Rules Changes Needed

[Chris Plumblee]

My guess is that some number of serious Assisted ops operated 12 hours
rather than 10, based on the fact that they were lumped in with the M/2
stations anyway. I've been told that is no longer permitted, and that
Single-Op Assisted entrants (though counted as M/2 in the results) must
abide by a 10-hour time limit in NAQP.

I suspect the informal inter-club competition drove some number of people
to operate NAQP in a way the sponsors didn't anticipate, by doing SO(A)
full-time for maximum score.

73,
Chris W4WF

On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 7:47 AM K8MR via CQ-Contest <
cq-contest at contesting.com> wrote:

> Going to high power competition, you'll still be at a disadvantage with
> other high power stations with big antennas. Your signal will stand out
> better compared with guys who don't have or don't use amplifiers.
>
> A different issue with the M/2 category is the ten minute rule. That
> leaves out M/2 stations as candidates for being moved to other bands, i.e.
> for a needed multiplier on a little used band (i.e. 10 Meters). On a good
> day I might be able to work W2FU on 10 meter groundwave, but there is no
> incentive for them to take the time and effort to try. Note - the rules do
> allow the M/2 station to make such QSOs; they just won't count, but will
> not lead to disqualification:
>
>
> iii) Starting when the first QSO on a band is logged, a transmitted signal
> cannot transmit on a different band until 10 full minutes have passed. Any
> QSOs made on a different band before 10 minutes have passed will not count
> for scoring. The other station will receive full credit for the QSO.
>
>
> There is another item in the rules that I don't understand:
>
> vii)  Multioperator entries with only one operator may be reclassified to
> single operator with
> assistance for scoring purposes.
>
> How does this make sense if there is no such category?
>
>
> 73  -  Jim   K8MR
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ku8e <ku8e at ku8e.com>
> To: Pete Smith N4ZR <pete.n4zr at gmail.com>; reflector cq-contest
> <CQ-Contest at Contesting.COM>
> Sent: Sun, Aug 8, 2021 3:05 pm
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] NAQP CW - Rules Changes Needed
>
>  NAQP is a low power contest so it supposedly levels the playing field? So
> I guess if you are using a dipole that's equal to using a beam on the
> tower? Personally I don't think running an amplifier makes a difference
> when going against the higher tier well equipped stations running low
> power. I've run my amplifier in NAQP in the past ( I didn't submit my
> score) and while I do a little better than if I ran low power it's still
> not even close to to top LP scores. The antennas you use is the equalizer
> not how much power you're running. So the concept of running low power to
> equal things is flawed.The rules for NAQP have been the same forever. When
> the rules were written years ago there weren't online packet clusters,
> skimmers or many people doing SO2R. Why not update them with the times?  It
> would be cool to have a domestic only contest that you can work everyone on
> all the bands and do it high power. Also have assisted and low power
> categories like every other contest.JeffSent from my Verizon, Samsung
> Galaxy smartphone
> -------- Original message --------From: Pete Smith N4ZR <
> pete.n4zr at gmail.com> Date: 8/8/21  11:18 AM  (GMT-05:00) To: reflector
> cq-contest <CQ-Contest at Contesting.COM> Subject: [CQ-Contest] NAQP CW -
> Rules Changes Needed 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 N4ZRCheck out the new Reverse Beacon Networkweb server at <
> http://beta.reversebeacon.net>.For spots, please use your
> favorite"retail" DX cluster._______________________________________________
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
-- 
Chris Plumblee
407.494.5155