[VHFcontesting] Pack Rovers meet ARRL contest objectives

Tue Aug 16 00:04:21 EDT 2005

Dennis,

I think George was complimenting you!  I think he only suggested that you 
make your log public to show exactly what you describe - that you do work 
as many different stations in the course of a contest as possible from as 
many grids as you go to and contrast that with a rover who only contacts 
the multi-op station that sent him out (captive rover).

As you describe your rover activities, in my opinion, they are exactly what 
the rover category is about.  Thanks for being out there.  As a single-op 
station, I rely on rovers like you to help my score and make the contest a 
lot more fun!  Sounds like you have fun doing it.

The concern is not with you (or rovers like you) but more with a couple of 
handfuls of rovers who ONLY contact usually just one other station from 
many grids (the multi-op station who sent them out and often provided them 
with the equipment) and which only benefits that multi-op.  The link 
George  included in his post seems to give significant evidence that this 
practice does exist and is not the equivalent of Big Foot or the Loch Ness 
Monster 
(http://lists.contesting.com/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2003-07/msg00294.html). 
Yes, I have read the entire thread and suggest you do too.  I believe that 
Tree has determined that the practice of captive roving does exist even 
though my friends in WNY feel otherwise - some really thoughtful posts in 
that thread.  Tree has significant log checking experience both on the vhf+ 
and the hf level and I respect his opinion on the subject.  This practice 
gives an advantage to the multi-op station who sent them out and doesn't 
help other stations in the contest.  Obviously, other multi-ops get upset 
at this practice since it gives such a big advantage to the multi-op that 
is able to send out these rovers which isn't an easy task - equipment must 
be provided and maintained from contest to contest, schedules need to be 
met, new ops need to be trained etc.

Even though this is a significant undertaking and quite the technical 
challenge, I'm sure - I am opposed to this practice (as a single-op 
station) because I would love to work just some of these captive rovers 
that are out there but their mission is to work the multi-op that sent them 
out and move on to the next grid.  I suppose I'm a little jealous or have 
"rover envy".  It would make the contest even more fun for me (and others 
including my direct competition) if we were able to make more contacts with 
more rovers.

I'm getting concerned, as this thread continues, that rovers like yourself 
will confuse the controversy about captive rovers and will get angry or 
discouraged and not want to be a rover anymore.  Don't let that happen - 
this controversy isn't about rovers like you.

I agree that changing the rules is not a way to win a contest, however, a 
rule change to somehow prohibit captive roving or to discourage the 
practice may make the contest more fun for all.

Time to get back to troubleshooting my 3456 MHz problem - the September 
contest is just around the corner.

73,
Ed K3DNE

At 09:40 PM 8/15/2005, you wrote:
>Please, I would no sooner give out my rover strategy than would ND3F
>or W3IY. This is a contest, and just like everyone else, my logs are
>between me and the ARRL and apparently a select few that claim to
>have impartial and private access to them. Maybe you can ask one of
>them.
>
>When you say "rover log in your part of the country" we have a small
>problem. I'm usually the only rover in that area. Not many rovers in
>the Eastern Townships of Quebec. In fact not many rovers in Quebec at
>all. I've worked another rover maybe once or twice on this route and
>that was usually on low bands towards Toronto. No other rover logs to
>compare to.
>
>I give out points. I give out rare grid squares. I attempt longer
>distance shots with the gear I've assembled. I promote VHF/UHF
>activity in otherwise inactive areas. I work as many people as I can.
>I've been doing this since I started in VHF. With the change in the
>rover rules, there is no way for my type of operation to compete with
>a 24+ grid rover going 70mph between population centers. But I try
>not to whine and complain. I just go about my business of activating
>rare grids, bettering my station and technical abilities. I work the
>stations that attempt to work me. Someday, I might get it together
>enough to win. I'm working on it.
>
>I don't have to explain myself to anyone, I'm quite pleased with what
>I've accomplished on VHF and I look forward to my future. But, please
>stop bitching about the rules. The way to win a contest is clear,
>work hard, promote VHF/UHF activity in your area. Many people here
>are capable of winning their category in the contest, but not willing
>to do the work. Changing the rules is not the way to win a contest.
>
>--
>Dennis Hudson, N2LBT/VE2/VE3/R
>http://www.n2lbt.com/
>
>
>On Aug 15, 2005, at 2:44 PM, George Fremin III wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 01:02:41PM -0400, n2lbt at n2lbt.com wrote:
> >
> >> It does not relate to the subject line. It has never been determined
> >> if a "Captive Rover" actually exists. It is a mythical creature.
> >>
> >
> > I think it has been shown that indeed they do exist.
> > As I recall there have been several posts on this list
> > explaining this subject.
> >
> > ie:
> > http://lists.contesting.com/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2003-07/
> > msg00294.html
> >
> >
> > I am guessing that you are not a captive rover - perhaps you
> > could post your rover logs for the last few years and show
> > us what a non-captive rover log in your part of the country looks
> > like.
> >
> >
> > --
> > 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