[CQ-Contest] Suggestion for the ARRL June VHF contest

Stan Zawrotny k4sbz.stan at gmail.com
Fri Oct 28 16:36:06 EDT 2022

In following this discussion, one would think that the ARRL, CQ and the
IARU are the only organizations that sponsor contests, so they can schedule
contests whenever they want. As one  who enters contests other than
sponsored by those organizations, I would like to point out that there are
2-5 contests every weekend, sponsored by clubs such as 10-10, state QSO
parties and contests from other countries (check out the WA7BNM Contest
Calendar). Most contest sponsors avoid scheduling contests on weekends when
there is one from the ARRL or CQ because they would attract fewer
contestants. Scheduling back-to-back-to-back contests along with Field Day
would wipe out June for anyone else to have an event. Adding two more
contests anytime of the year would jam up an already crowded calendar.
Please remember that the USA is not alone on this planet. The state QSO
parties already feel jammed trying to get 47 contests in the current 52
week calendar while avoiding the major events.

I concur with most of the other comments opposed to multiple contests.

In most contests, the operators are challenging others using the same mode.
SSB ops don't normally compare their scores with CW categories. Maintaining
categories for each mode, plus mixed, creates and atmosphere of four
separate contests (SSB, CW, Digital and Mixed) running concurrently. 34 of
the state QSO parties are able to work with those category distinctions for

I think the analog/digital division is not a good idea because it combines
CW and SSB, forcing SSB to compete with CW while digital has its own

Contest ebulliently,
Stan, K4SBZ

On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 1:05 PM Ed Kucharski <k3dne at comcast.net> wrote:

> Jim,
> I was not aware of the IARU HF Championship rules (I haven't op'd that
> before) but I did submit a proposal similar to the ARRL 10m Contest. See
> more below - its similar to what I just posted on the ARRL Contesting
> reflector - sorry for the additional bandwidth.
> Similar to a few others, I have submitted a proposal to ARRL addressing
> VHF+ contest rules. I was happy to see the "Analog Only" subcategory but I
> don't feel it goes far enough to fully address the issues. Where I live in
> SC (EM94) I did not notice any significant increase in analog activity in
> the recent September contest - there was a lot of SSB activity in June on
> 6m probably due to the excellent sporadic -E conditions (in this area) but
> I did not notice a significant increase in 2m analog activity then.
> The proposal I submitted is modeled off of the successful and popular ARRL
> 10m contest where the operating categories include Phone only, CW only and
> Mixed Mode (PH+CW).  I proposed the categories of "Legacy" (Analog = Phone
> and CW) Only, Digital Only and Mixed (Analog + Digital) categories in VHF+
> contests (Jan,Jun and Sept). This is unique because it would allow 2 QSO's
> on the same band with the same station (an analog QSO and a digital QSO). I
> am not in favor of creating an additional category for CW only - Technician
> Class licensees (and other newer "no-code" licensees) who have privileges
> above 30MHz may not be able to participate in that category due to their
> lack of CW knowledge/proficiency/skill and may discourage an entire group
> of potential operators who don't do CW. My proposal also includes a
> restriction on cross-mode QSO's between analog and digital (NO
> restrictions, as usual, between phone and cw cross-mode QSO's). In my
> original proposal I suggested to keep scoring as
>  it is now, however I'm starting to buy into an analog QSO being weighted
> more heavily than a digital QSO to further encourage analog participation.
> The ARRL 10m Contest does QSO point weighting so there is a precedent set
> for that concept. I may amend my original proposal with similar wordage and
> send it off again.
> The recent suggestions of having 2 or 3 June contests (phone, cw, digital)
> seems (to me) as a time intensive proposition - many of us don't have 3
> weekends in June (don't forget Field Day is also in June) to operate more
> VHF+ contests. I just don't see rovers, portable stations, multi-ops and
> many single-ops being able to dedicate that kind of time. And, what about
> September and January? Do we suggest 3 contest weekends then too or neglect
> those 2 other contests? I don't think those months can absorb 3 VHF+
> contest weekends or be neglected from any new VHF+ rules.
> 73,
> Ed K3DNE
> >     On 10/26/2022 10:27 PM K8MR via CQ-Contest <
> cq-contest at contesting.com mailto:cq-contest at contesting.com > wrote:
> >
> >
> >     A better parallel would be the IARU HF Championship. It has single
> mode, CW or SSB, and mixed mode categories.
> >     Also, for VHF distinguish only  between "analog" or digital, i.e.
> keep SSB and CW together. Over the years I've had many QSOs where a guy
> can't copy me on SSB, but does when I switch to CW.  I've never heard of an
> FT8 to CW mixed mode QSO.
> >
> >     73  -  Jim  K8MR
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >     -----Original Message-----
> >     From: Mark, K5AM <k5am at zianet.com mailto:k5am at zianet.com >
> >     To: cq-contest at contesting.com mailto:cq-contest at contesting.com
> >     Sent: Wed, Oct 26, 2022 7:10 pm
> >     Subject: [CQ-Contest] Suggestion for the ARRL June VHF contest
> >
> >
> >     Suggestion for the ARRL June VHF contest
> >
> >     Recently introduced digital modes have resulted in a
> >     major change in the way contesters have operated in the
> >     June VHF contest. A wide spectrum of opinions have been
> >     expressed on the various e-mail lists. Many operators are
> >     concerned for the long-term health of VHF contesting. To
> >     what is considered by some to be a serious problem, there
> >     is a feasible solution.
> >
> >     On HF (for example, Sweepstakes and DX) ARRL has had
> >     separate contests for CW, SSB, RTTY, and recently
> >     Digital. However, VHF has been slighted, like a neglected
> >     child, with ARRL providing only combined-mode contests.
> >     This inexplicable situation is easily corrected.
> >
> >     Suggestion for an ARRL June VHF contest series.
> >     1. Three separate contests will be held, on the first
> >     three weekends in June.
> >     2. Each of the three contests will be conducted using a
> >     single mode.
> >     3. In 2023, the sequence of modes will be SSB, Digital, CW.
> >     In subsequent years, the modes will be rotated.
> >
> >     Notes.
> >     1. The September and January VHF contests can be
> >     considered later, after an experimental three contest
> >     series in June 2023.
> >     2. As with any proposed scheme, there are obvious pros
> >     and cons; the challenge for operators is to balance
> >     individual circumstances with VHF contesting in general,
> >     and the long-term picture.
> >
> >     73,
> >
> >     Mark, K5AM
> >     https://www.zianet.com/k5am/
> >
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     CQ-Contest mailing list
> >     CQ-Contest at contesting.com mailto:CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> >     http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     CQ-Contest mailing list
> >     CQ-Contest at contesting.com mailto:CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> >     http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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