[VHFcontesting] What is accomplished?

Sat Feb 7 21:40:45 EST 2009

You know, if the government spent this much time working on fixing the budget, we'd all be richer, the economy would be thriving and every rainbow would end at a pot of gold. Unfortunately, life and many things aren't "fair" to someone or others ..

I've watched this thread and others like it with interest and angst for years ...  From my home, I'm really not able to contest on VHF and above, for many reasons including keeping neighbors friendly and not being able to pay the extortion charged by my city for engineering and permitting requirements ...

Instead, I pack up more antennas and gear than many amateurs even own, much less have in use, haul it all to a hill or mountain top, spend one to two days setting up multiple yagi's, microwave dishes, verticals and then all of the radios ...

Then it's contest time ...  24, 30 and more hours, followed by tear down, packing everything back up, taking it home and unloading it all to wait for another "weekend".

All of this from the VHF plus contesting armpit of the United States, in San Diego.

If I'm lucky, I'll work about 70% fixed stations, and perhaps the remaining 30% mobile, many of which are "rovers". In some cases a rover is declared on the fly, simply because the incidental contact is driving from point a to point b, not sure if they're going to cross an invisible grid square line. In other cases, I'll catch travellers going across the US - Mexico border, or crossing state lines on travel to Arizona or Nevada. 

I'll also make contact with what I'll affectionately call the "N6NB Entourage" while they're in range and working their course, typically moving north and away from the coast. Candidly, I'm grateful for the extra bands, points and grid squares. Often times, this group will be the only ones with capabilities on 902 and higher. Additionally, I'm always appreciative of anyone who (until recently) braved 4+ dollar a gallon gas just to drive around like mad men (and women) and push operating conditions and limits. Note, contrary to what some apparently believe, they DO work others outside their travelling group.

Have you figured out yet that I don't care too much about "scores" ? I guess this gets back to the original question as well, "What is accomplished" ?

I never stand a chance of getting a nationally recognised rating or score, we simply don't have the ham population in southern California to support it - fixed or mobile. I do however enjoy putting DM12 on many folks maps and logs that otherwise won't have it. I enjoy moving to the digital modes in the evening when regular traffic starts to wane and picking up the odd stuff off of burning rocks and the Moon instead of calling it an evening. 

I've always been and to this day remain facinated that this "stuff" works at all - antennas,radios, propagation, digital modes, and folks also crazy enough to engage in it. I've always told people it's like fishing, you get what you get, sometimes you're lucky, sometimes not. There are people that like to fish in the ocean and streams, others may prefer lakes, including ones that are "stocked". Everyone is going to have an opinion about what is best, what is fair and what is legal. Everyone also has a chance to choose which they prefer or even to participate.

If I don't think it's fair because the northeastern states have such a high population of active operators and ultimately win the majority of all categories in every contest with nationally recognised scores, should I suggest that we start playing this like bowling or a golf game ? Handicap operators to balance out scoring because they have the "advantage" that I will never have ? Probably not a very popular thought, and frankly while I find the thought amusing, I'd never suggest it because it's simply rediculous to consider. The rules are the rules, folks have and will continue to be critical of them but until they're changed, not much we can do about it until then.

Maybe I should start the charge to "equalize" the scoring to give Southern California a realistic chance to score well or high nationally ? How 'bout we focus on that instead of a dedicated group of operators that simply work the rules as they are today ?

Nah, didn't think so  :-)

OBTW - since we're all so detail oriented and passionate about this stuff, please note that Carrie is driving an Infiniti, NOT a Lexus ....

regards, kg6iyn

--- On Sat, 2/7/09, James Duffey <JamesDuffey at comcast.net> wrote:

From: James Duffey <JamesDuffey at comcast.net>
Subject: [VHFcontesting] What is accomplished?
To: vhfcontesting at contesting.com
Cc: "James Duffey" <JamesDuffey at comcast.net>
Date: Saturday, February 7, 2009, 5:47 PM

Steve - I understand your frustration. But I think it is misplaced.

The question  "What is accomplished?" can be applied to all of us,
and  
probably has been at one time or another. What is accomplished by  
straight (non-circling) roving? Well you and I have an answer to that;  
it is fun, rewarding, and technically challenging, but I suspect that  
much of the population will go "So what?" when they hear that I spent

an entire weekend and drive 710 miles to  make 87 contacts, many with  
the same people. One would probably get the same reaction for amateur  
radio contesting in general by the general population. It all boils  
down to different strokes for different folks.

You and others in the northeast corridor are blessed with an amateur  
radio population density that is quite active at VHF/UHF and hence  
have a lot of stations to work in contests. Much of the rest of the  
country is not, including Southern California, believe it or not. Grid  
squaring creates a high population density of VHF active hams. Simply  
put, grid squaring gets people out and active that otherwise would not  
be. One an argue that it is artificial, but it is effective.

Now one can argue that the scoring should be adjusted so that regular  
stations are more competitive with these stations. And that is a fair  
argument. But I think that the argument should go deeper than that.

Grid squaring (circling) is only part of the problem. The scores in  
the limited rover category by the grid circlers are inflated by the  
additional QSO points for the microwave bands. The grid circling  
scores would be in line with the rest of the limited class if the  
additional microwave points were not added in.

In short, I think that the scoring and reporting should be revisited  
so that the contest is interesting to everybody and no one's specific  
interest is eliminated.

There are several solutions to this problem, if you think that this is  
a problem. We have covered all of these at one time or another. The  
VUAC has  suggested that the new rules are a trial balloon and will be  
in place a while before additional changes are made.  Here are some  
suggestions that have been put forward before.

1. Score and report all entries by grid square. This makes sense as  
the grid square is the exchange. Report contest results by grid  
square. Rovers would compete with other category (single op, QRP  
single op, multi op) stations in each grid they operate from. In  
addition Rover scores from the separate grids would be aggregated for  
a separate Rover competition.

2. Use distance based scoring, as in the 10 GHz contest. Give 100  
points for each initial contact with a station, and 1 point per  
kilometer of distance between stations worked. Exchange 6 digit grid  
squares. Stations can be reworked if one station has moved a  
reasonable distance. say 50 or 60 kilometers. Nobody grid circles in  
the 10 GHz contest.

3. Several years ago, K5AM suggested a two tier approach for  
categories that went something like this:

Low Bands (6, 2, 1.35 and .7)
1. QRP
2. single op low
3. single op high
4. Multi op
5. Rover classic
6. Rover unlimited

High bands (all bands above 902MHz)
1. QRP
2. single op low
3. single op high
4. Multi op
5. Rover classic
6. Rover unlimited

A station can enter in the low category, the high category, or both.

Other changes that are equally viable, but that may be viewed as  
unfairly punitive (and are in some cases) include:

4. Require a minimum distance, say 1 km, for QSOs between rovers.

5. Set time limits, say an hour, on a Rover making additional QSOs  
after revisiting a grid square.

6. Eliminate the extra QSO points for microwave contacts. All QSO  
points are worth 1.

7. Change the QSO limit from 100 per rover to 100 total with other  
rovers.

8. Change the rover limit from 100 per rover to a smaller amount, say  
30 or so.

9. Ban grid circling outright.

There are 3 VHF/UHF contests and a UHF contest. There is no reason why  
the rules need ot be the same for all. In fact, a diverse set of  
competition may be more attractive to participants than the same old  
thing one after another.

So, a modest proposal that the VUAC might consider is:

1. Leave the June contest as it is, essentially a free for all.

2. Implement distance based scoring in the UHF contest and in the  
January contest.

3. Institute K5AM's suggested categories in the September contest,  
along with scoring and reporting scores by grid square.

Or whatever may be better suggestions from others?

By the way, although results are not officially out, it looks like you  
won the September VHF contest limited rover division. Congratulations!  
- Duffey

--
KK6MC
James Duffey
Cedar Crest NM

_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting