[UK-CONTEST] G4PIQ/P ARRL CW Report

[Tim-M0BEW]

> BERU has its own special place; but the failure of the Jubilee contest
> to really take off on a world scale is a strong argument against
> organising any further Commonwealth-based contest as a regular event.

Was Jubilee contest a 'failure' ?
504 entreis, 42 checklogs and 4 swl logs. Pretty good for a first year run.

Not bad for a contest that didn't allow inter EU qsos or encourage mainland
USA activity.
I can't find results but dare I say perhaps more than IOTA's first year.
The Jubilee contest, based on log entries, was the 2nd most successfull
contest by the HFCC, yet you think it was a failure.
In my view certian rules and scoring were not ideal, but IOTA has had many
tweaks over the years to make it better. This one should of had the same
treatment.
It was dropped for a reason, but because it was a failure wasn't one of
them.

Tim-M0BEW.



----- Original Message -----
From: "Ian White, G3SEK" <G3SEK at ifwtech.co.uk>
To: <uk-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2003 12:00 PM
Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] G4PIQ/P ARRL CW Report


> Andy Cook, G4PIQ wrote:
> >This is a great contest for small stations in the UK to play in - lots
> >of relatively easy stations to work with a multiplier scheme which is
> >effective enough even with a small station. If we're talking about
> >contests which could form the basis of a contest within a contest
> >structure, this (and it's SSB counterpart) could well be one good
> >candidate.
>
> It seems a very good idea to organise some UK competition within the
> framework of existing large world-wide contests - in addition to
> existing domestic contests, of course.
>
> For small nations (and, in activity terms, that includes us) running
> "rest of world works us" contests is very much like running a national
> flag-carrier airline. Eventually, such contests seem doomed to suffer
> the same embarrassing fate - and for exactly the same reason: one  small
> country isn't big enough to make the operation viable.
>
> The biggest difference... and I only mean this sadly, not unkindly... is
> that it's much harder to tell when a contest is going bankrupt.
>
> Instead, let's focus on what we do well. We have a good range of
> domestic contests, some of which are supported very well indeed. On the
> international scale, Britain does make a world-class contribution by
> running the IOTA contest, which is growing nicely.
>
> BERU has its own special place; but the failure of the Jubilee contest
> to really take off on a world scale is a strong argument against
> organising any further Commonwealth-based contest as a regular event.
>
> However, if we are going to explore the possibilities of encouraging UK
> competition within an existing world-wide contest, three points arise.
> The first is whether the admin side can be made to work, as has already
> been discussed. The second is that any such contest should be introduced
> *instead of* one of the existing flag-carrier contests, for the reasons
> I just gave.
>
> Third, is the ARRL contest is the right one to choose? It has three
> major disadvantages: you can only work Ws and VEs; all other DX is
> off-limits for the weekend; and all the strong Europeans (including us)
> are nothing but QRM to one another. This is not a good formula for
> increasing the activity from moderately-equipped G stations.
>
> In contrast, the truly world-wide format of CQWW guarantees continuous
> action for everybody, because almost every station is worth something to
> everyone else. If we are to explore this option, I think CQWW should be
> the first choice.
>
>
> --
> 73 from Ian G3SEK
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest