[VHFcontesting] My Wrap-up and Personal Clarification

[Radiosporting Fan]

Now that most of this has settled (and we're all going
to our happy places) I wanted to clarify something
about my posts.

I am fully (and in an unqualified manner) *against*
the practice of Grid Circling (yes, I've done it).  It
runs contrary to what I believe radio contests are all
about (working stations and distance on RF bands).  I
think that the ARRL agrees with me, but they been
painted into a corner through "look the other way"
strategies (possibly due to staffing volume
constraints).

I believe that the ARRL agrees because:
--------------------------------------

1. One of the variables in generating a score is
"number of unique callsigns".  There were those that
exploited this through inviting multiple operators (or
loaning calls) to stations to give out points.  The
ARRL now includes a rule that says such a strategy is
prohibited.

Another exploitive strategy was employed at Multiops
as they logged QSO's with members of their own team by
use of HT's "during the breaks in the action".  That
is now prohibited (though only on frequencies below
2.3 GHz for some reason).

2. One of the variables is grid.  Understanding the
advantage of getting through as many Grids as possible
(literally circling within one when activity warranted
it) some contested from an airplane.  Aeronautical
contacts are now prohibited.

Interestingly, the same strategy employed in "slower
motion" is allowed today as long as you aren't in the
air.

In conclusion: Though I am *opposed* to it, Grid
Circling is fully approved with the present set of
rules and their interpretation by "The Commissioner". 
On a related topic, Captive Rovers don't exist because
they cannot be clearly defined (not because people
don't become captivated by the strategy).

There is a very simple solution to the Grid Circling
issue...and that is to level the scoring (not playing)
field for all participants (it is not level now, when
the score of one class of station is calculated
differently from that of all others).  It would mean
that strategies for Rovers would change (duh).  That
is not bad considering those strategies were formed
based on the artificial scoring environment that
presently exists.

Employing the definitive change (yes, one exists that
hasn't been discussed on-list) to the calculation of
Rover scores would require the willingness to think in
a non-partisan and non-entitled way (can we do it? 
probably not on a list serve <g>).

In the mean time, be sure to have a go at the online
survey:
http://www.pollmonkey.com/p.asp?U=2021122898

Ev, W2EV



		
____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs