[UK-CONTEST] RSGB Contest Committee

[Chris G3SJJ]

  Paul, you have still missed the point on this. Sprints etc are usually entered by participants who have particularly targeted that event because 
they like the look of the format, or want a different kind of challenge. That is fine and is a format specified in the rules that can be policed, and 
penalised if appropriate, particularly for smaller contests.

You appear to be suggesting that there should be a specfic rule change in IOTA. Surely this would mean penalising those who sent 59(9) or those who 
logged it. Sure, s/w can be changed but this is the tail wagging the dog. As I said before, you have to cater for the casual ops who aren't interested 
in specific rules and those, probably like me, with up to 50 years of contesting experience, who want to continue sending the 59(9) (and at the same 
speed!)

The IOTA Contest is 17 years old with a successful and recognised format so why target that for a major change? There are lots of other smaller events 
where this could be trialled. Many of us have agreed that a small tweak in the scoring would be helpful from 2012 onwards, but you are in danger of 
losing the whole argument by continuing this theme.

So far you suggesting two changes in scoring plus omitting 59(9). A bridge too far, me thinks!

Chris G3SJJ






On 08/08/2010 13:46, Paul O'Kane wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Andy Cook G4PIQ"<g4piq at btinternet.com>
>
>> RST adds structure and makes us look a little less
>> ridiculous to non-contesters.
> I'd suggest that it's precisely the meaningless
> exchange of 59(9) in IOTA and other major HF
> contests that makes us look ridiculous to non-
> contesters and to many VHF+ contesters?
>
> Does anyone disagree?
>
> As for structure, we all know that when we call
> another station and hear our callsign, we expect
> to have to log whatever comes after the callsign.
> None of us needs extra time to get ready - we are
> contesters, and the Sprints have already shown
> that "what you don't expect, you don't miss".
>
> At the risk of stating the obvious, the only way
> to shorten the IOTA exchange is to remove one or
> more of the exchange elements.
>
> The IOTA Reference has to stay because it affects
> points and multipliers.  The leaves 5NN or Serial
> to be dropped - and why drop an element that has
> to be copied on-air, and can't be pre-filled by
> logging software?
>
> Here's what the structure of an IOTA QSO would
> look like.
>
> Me:    EI5DI TEST
> You:   G2XYZ
> Me:    G2XYZ 091 EU115  (you log 091 EU115)
> You:   026 EU5          (I log 026 EU5)
> Me:    TU EI5DI
>
> A change too far?  Hardly!
>
> 73,
> Paul EI5DI
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>