[VHFcontesting] What about me? I am captive.

[Kenneth E. Harker]

On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 03:00:12AM -0400, w3sz wrote:

> The captive rover is a mythical beast.  ...
>
> I also know the guys who make up W3CCX and W8GP, two other big multi-op  
> stations in this part of the country, and while I have not visited their  
> multioperator stations, I know them well enough so that I do not believe  
> that they have captive rovers either.  So I really do not believe that the  
> fictitious beast 'captive rover' exists at all.

If captive rovers are "mythical" then explain why the ARRL's recent Ad-Hoc 
VHF/UHF Study Committee was tasked with (among other things) "Strengthen 
the rules to minimize the rover practices known as grid circling and captive
rovers."  The final report (delivered to the ARRL BOD meeting July 16-17, 
2004) had this to say on the subject:

  "Grid circling is the practice of pairs rovers going to the junction of 
  4 grid squares and working each other at short distances while moving 
  through each of the grids.  This can mean 16 QSOs per band for 10 or more 
  bands, and can generate huge scores (millions of points) while not 
  encouraging contacts with other contest participants.  Requiring a minimum 
  distance for rover QSOs would help to minimize this type of activity.  A 
  captive rover is a station that only (or primarily) works one multi-operator
  station during the contest.  This may be the norm in less populated areas 
  of the country because there is little other activity, but in populated 
  areas it can generate considerable angst among competitors.  The practice 
  that generates the most heat is a rover that only works one multi-op and 
  does not work others in the area.  Many of them never submit logs.  Because 
  the rovers are usually going to rare grids and have microwave equipment 
  on multiple bands, their efforts can really boost the scores of those 
  they work.  The current rules are fairly weak in their attempt to encourage 
  rovers to operate in a way that gives a chance to all stations in the area 
  to work them and should be strengthened."

The Study Committee members were K1KI, W5ZN, N7NG, N0AX, K1JX, K2UA, W3ZZ, 
AA7A, KM0T, and N1ND.  As from the suggestion of minimum distance rover
QSOs (which has not been implemented in the rules yet) the committee failed 
to arrive at a consensus solution to the captive rover problem.  But the
committee very clearly identifies that there is a captive rover problem
the deserves correction for the health of the contests.

We have also heard testimony from one of the log checkers, N6TR, that in 
his personal opinion these kind of operations both exist and are obvious 
for a human looking at the logs to spot.  Tree is a member of the CQ Contest
Hall of Fame and lives far away from any of the recent circle rover and 
captive rover activities.  There should be no reason to doubt him.
 
> I also know most of the rovers in this part of the country and know that  
> they are not captive, and do not avoid working other stations [what a  
> ridiculous and demeaning concept]!

Art KY1K has offered eye-witness testimony to the contrary:
http://lists.contesting.com/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2005-08/msg00056.html

I don't see how anyone can deny that captive rovers exist.

-- 
Kenneth E. Harker WM5R
kenharker at kenharker.com
http://www.kenharker.com/