[VHFcontesting] wb8wsf's question

[frank bechdoldt]

The intent of the limited rover was to give a newbie a chance to play along and compete.  Thats why its 4 bands.  A guy could do it with a IC 706 and a 222 fm rig. I posted 30,000 points like this on my first rove.  Oddly enough last year I posted less with 7 bands. the difference was less turn out. Its too bad that this new catagory intended for newbies was hi jacked by a team effort.> Subject: RE: [VHFcontesting] wb8wsf's question> Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2008 22:20:24 -0400> From: jshupienis at ccac.edu> To: k3uhf at hotmail.com; vhfcontesting at contesting.com> > > As a relative newcomer, I've been just sitting back and reading this thread.> > It's time to voice my opinion, so here goes.> > * 1 hour from first QSO in a grid to the first QSO in the next grid. Yes. (Precedent: ARRL General Contest rule 3.15)> * 6-digit grid square. Maybe. Kind of hard to do without a new GPS for roving while in motion.> * Limits to rover-to-rover contacts. Undecided. Doesn't affect small-fry like me. Seems like it was easily circumvented by the grid-circlers.> > (SARCASM MODE ON) > > Why not just outlaw grid-circling, period? Disqualification would be a start. What does it add to VHF+ contesting? Does it add activity? (None that matters to ME!)> > Once we've cleared that up, we can move on to captive rovers, and the stations who "own" them. (They don't give ME any points so no loss to ME!) Disqualify 'em all!> > Next, let's get rid of those rovers who make mistakes, log dupes, whine on this reflector... Disqualified, disqualified, DISQUALIFIED! ... Oh wait! I'M one of them! Oh Nooooooooo!> > (/SARCASM)> > The bottom line is, we have to draw the line somewhere. But it should be clear, accomplish a specific purpose and fit in with the spirit of the contest. And let's keep it simple. Obviously the Rover rule changes didn't stop the grid-circlers from spoiling other peoples fun.> > Maybe we should say what we mean, and mean what we say. For example: "The new ROVER-TEAM category is for grid-circling groups and captive rovers only. The aggregate score for the entire team will be accepted as a single entry. Individual scores from team members will not be accepted in this or any category."> > I think that would give them all a place to play, and could foster some competition among those so inclined. It would let the rest of us do ROVER, ROVER-LIMITED and ROVER-UNLIMITED on a truly competitive basis.> > Speaking of... Maybe we really don't need three (or four) types of rover categories. Many other contests get by with few categories, and we could say: ROVER and ROVER-UNLIMITED. If you use any of: high power (as currently defined), more than 4 bands, more than 2 operators, you become UNLIMITED.> > Most importantly, a consensus among us all is difficult to achieve but necessary before fiddling with the rules any more. They are too convoluted as it is.> > -----Original Message-----> From: frank bechdoldt [mailto:k3uhf at hotmail.com]> Sent: Sun 7/27/2008 8:46 PM> To: vhfcontesting at contesting.commit to > Subject: [VHFcontesting] wb8wsf's question> > > Steve asked what would I do.> > Ive been vocal on this about 5 or 6 years.> Had some good ideas and some lame ones.> You could find some of them in the past postings back to 2003 or so.> > I think I'm better educated on thisngs than before. At first I wanted team roving banned. But they do spur some activity. > > I am quite firm in the idea that team roving should be in its own catagory.> It was the intent of the Arrl to encourage people who team rove to submit their logs in this catagory. However intent and encorage does not work with strong willed individuals.
_________________________________________________________________
Use video conversation to talk face-to-face with Windows Live Messenger.
http://www.windowslive.com/messenger/connect_your_way.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Refresh_messenger_video_072008