[VHFcontesting] Re: Recent trends in Logs and Qs, VHF contests

[John Geiger]

Curt,

thanks for all of the data.  Any idea as to why logs
received maxed out in the early to mid 90s, and have
been declining since?

I also agree that we do not need to based points on
distance for QSOs.  We need to keep logging as simple
as possible.  If you make the points too hard to
calculate, people will stop sending logs in.  There
are still hams who use paper logging-myself included
when I go portable or roving.  If we want to encourage
new hams to get into VHF contesting, we need to keep
it as simple as possible.  

With all of the current rigs out there that cover
VHF/UHF as well as HF, we should see activity growing
steadily.  Rigs like the FT100D, Icom 706MKIIG, and
TS2000 are the stuff that one could only dream about
in the late 80s and early 90s.  Now if they would only
add 222 and 902 to some of these rigs!

73s John NE0P
--- "Curtis C. Roseman" <croseman at almaak.usc.edu>
wrote:
> George et al.:
> 
>     Here are some numbers.  First, the number of
> logs submitted for the
> three ARRL VHF/UHF contests since 1975 from QST
> write-ups (note a few of
> these numbers are estimates or interpolations, but
> the overall trends
> should be correct):
> 
> 	Jan	June	Sept
> 1975	590	340	285
>  	630	410	230
>  	780	490	340
>  	840	480	330
>  	890	510	410
> 1980	995	500	380
>  	970	540	390
>  	940	590	448
>  	950	510	436
>  	800	590	450
> 1985	880	530	434
>  	890	630	460
>  	840	691	386
>  	845	650	400
>  	930	650	425
> 1990	910	600	439
>  	912	480	415
>  	958	610	591
>  	1036	818	621
>  	1200	820	714
> 1995	1150	837	720
>  	1150	921	710
>  	1020	837	752
>  	1010	800	700
>  	900	701	606
> 2000	820	710	582
>  	799	680	553
> 
> 	 Whereas it is true that the numbers are down over
> the last few
> years, the current levels are comparable to (or
> better than) most of the
> 1980s and clearly higher than the mid-1970s.
> 
> 	Now, let's look at the highest national QSO totals
> on 6 and 2 in
> June and Sept (since 1987):
> 
> 	June	Sept	June	Sept
> 	Hi Qs	Hi Qs	Hi Qs	Hi Qs
> 	6mtrs	6mtrs	2mtrs	2mtrs
> 
> 1987	985	281	615	555
> 1988	688	338	673	573
> 1989	366	380	574	672
> 1990	527	359	656	699
> 1991	630	396	599	510
> 1992	976	418	641	870
> 1993	732	373	778	697
> 1994	472	417	752	883
> 1995	558	343	833	702
> 1996	1161	404	786	643
> 1997	674	493	864	762
> 1998	1358	562	770	671
> 1999	1077	607	725	736
> 2000	1104	668	655	700
> 2001	909	957	607	963
> 
> 	Over the last few years, six meter qso totals have
> been higher
> than EVER, and two meter totals as high as ever.  
> These data are only for
> the single highest total each year, but they reflect
> the overall trends
> for many stations and many regions over the years. 
> The increase on six
> (and perhaps also on two) is partly due to the
> incorporation of that band
> into main-line HF rigs.  QSO totals have generally
> gone up on other
> bands as well, as we have more rovers and others
> using more and more
> bands, and almost ever year several records are
> broken in various
> categories in various regions.  (I have similar data
> for Grid totals,
> which vary quite a bit more from year to year with
> changing band conditions.)
> 
> 	In summary, activity is up, but log submissions are
> down somewhat.
> We dont need to change the rules, we need to send in
> our logs.  (I have
> plenty of opinions about proposed rules changes that
> I may put into
> another message.   My overall feeling is that we
> have plenty of categories
> and distance scoring is not a good idea -- because
> better stations and
> operators already are rewarded with distance worked
> because they get more
> grids.  That is the beauty of the grid system; more
> distance, more
> grids.)
> 
> 73, Curt Roseman k9aks
> 
> 
> On Mon, 2 Sep 2002, George Fremin III - K5TR wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 08:04:46PM +0000, Bill
> Olson wrote:
> > >
> > > 1. Is the reason there is a decline in contest
> activity because the
> > > "playing field" is not level???? I don't think
> so. Look back in old QST's
> > > at contest results. There were TWO entr
> > > ant categories: Single op, Multiop. And
> multipliers were arrl sections..
> > > not grids. That is about as unequal a playing
> field as we have ever had,
> > > yet there was a LOT of activity. Maybe
> participation is declining because
> > > the ham population is declining or at least the
> ham population interested
> > > in this stuff. Plus there are a LOT more things
> to do these days!!
> >
> >
> > I really wish someone would give us some hard
> numbers of this
> > "decline in contest activity".  I have seen this
> thrown up
> > several times on this list in the last year but I
> do not
> > recall anyone providing any proof of this "fact".
> >
> >
> > Earlier this year I did look at the numbers of
> logs submitted
> > for the threee major ARRL VHF contests and found
> that they
> > were all within +/- 40-50 entries over those
> years.
> >
> > This does not seem like decline to me - it would
> seem that
> > good or bad conditions would have at least this
> > much affect on entries.
> >
> > From personal experiance I would say activity has
> been up
> > but the only proof I have for that is some big 6m
> scores in the june contests.
> >
> > Anyway - I guess it just gets to me when I read
> folks claims of
> > declining acvitiy without any proof to back it up.
> >
> >
> > --
> > George Fremin III - K5TR
> > geoiii at kkn.net
> > http://www.kkn.net/~k5tr
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > VHFcontesting mailing list
> > VHFcontesting at contesting.com
> >
>
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
> >
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> VHFcontesting mailing list
> VHFcontesting at contesting.com
>
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes
http://finance.yahoo.com