[VHFcontesting] New VHF+ contest rules

Sun Dec 16 12:45:30 EST 2007

In my opinion, the idea that a VHF QSO party participant might abuse the 4 band rules is overblown.

Let's say that you intend to operate the four low bands, but 1 hour into the contest your 222 rig fails and cannot be repaired.  To salvage the contest you fire up your 1296 equipment and run the rest of the contest without 222.  I don't believe that such a predicament should be outlawed.

However, the log checking robot would have a difficult time with fair log checking unless the 222 QSOs are submitted.

Even if someone wants to operate on 5 bands and select the best four later, who is harmed by that?  I wouldn't want to waste my time on a fifth band, but that would be my decision, not any unwritten "ethics" rules.

73,  Fred  K2TR

aa4zz at aol.com wrote: 
?I know of no time (at least here in the SE) where a 1296 score would ever approach the score of? well equipped 222 station. I also think a pass from 1296 to a lower band very unlikely and certainly not common enough to significantly effect scores.
?? For us at AA4ZZ 1296 is run just to help?others and frankly if it affects our score, it is to lower it, because of the lost time and focus from the other bands.

73 Paul AA4ZZ

Allowing a "limited multi" station with more than four bands to operate 
the contest on all of their available bands opens the door for "cherry 
picking" the best four bands after the contest is over for their limited 
multi-op entry.  For example, 50/144/432 are usually the best three, but 
operating both 222 and 1.2G during the contest and picking the best band 
and the "fourth" is unfair, and is in no way within the intent of the 
rules.  In addition, to be fair such an entry should not be allowed to 
pass any station "from" any band which they will not be claiming in 
their "official" score.

-----Original Message-----
From: David Pruett 
To: kr7o at vhfdx.com
Cc: kx9x at arrl.org; vhfcontesting at contesting.com
Sent: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 12:49 pm
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] New VHF+ contest rules

All:

While I acknowledge the point Robert is trying to make, there is a dark 
"other" side to this which I think gets ignored.

Allowing a "limited multi" station with more than four bands to operate 
the contest on all of their available bands opens the door for "cherry 
picking" the best four bands after the contest is over for their limited 
multi-op entry.  For example, 50/144/432 are usually the best three, but 
operating both 222 and 1.2G during the contest and picking the best band 
and the "fourth" is unfair, and is in no way within the intent of the 
rules.  In addition, to be fair such an entry should not be allowed to 
pass any station "from" any band which they will not be claiming in 
their "official" score.

I sense Robert is trying to prevent the contest's rules from 
inadvertently creating any negative impact on activity levels.  This is 
an admirable goal, but IMHO the integrity of the competition takes 
precedence.  I don't think it's fair to blame lower levels of microwave 
activity on the limited multi category.  If people have microwave gear 
and don't get on because activity is low, that's their choice.  There is 
nothing forcing them to run limited multi, other than the fact that they 
apparently think it's more fun.

Limited multi is what got me to buy equipment for 50/144/222/432 and try 
to pull together a bunch of guys to operate the contest.  While I think 
microwaves are cool, and I admire the guys who go to the trouble to get 
it working, to me it's more work and $$$ than I'm willing to undertake.

There's two sides...

73,

Dave/K8CC

kr7o at vhfdx.com wrote:
> I am going to try and stay out of the rover issue.  There were some good 
> changes made, and some...... (I will stop here).  Time will tell.   Out on 
> the west coast, but the limited-multi fixed class killed 95% of all 
> microwave activity in CA for years.
>
> Related to that:
>
> 2.6.2.Limited Multioperator: Stations submit logs with a maximum of four 
> bands used. (Logs from additional bands used, if any, should be included as 
> checklogs.)
>
> I am not sure if this exact wording was in the previous version, but the 
> SHOULD in this line needs to read MUST BE SUBMITTED!  In this era of 
> computer log checking where participants are penalized for NIL contacts, it 
> is unacceptable for any multi-op to submit a partial log.  They MUST submit 
> their entire log and the the Cabrillo header needs to specify which bands 
> that station wishes judged for the contest.
>
>
>
>
> 73, Robert KR7O/YB2ARO, DM07ba/OI52ee  (ex.  N7STU)
> kr7o at vhfdx.com
>
> www.vhfdx.com (KR7O/YB2ARO homepages)
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

________________________________________________________________________
More new features than ever.  Check out the new AOL Mail ! - http://webmail.aol.com
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting

---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals?  Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.