[VHFcontesting] Contesting Philosophy

[Steve Clifford]

I guess I would put myself into the category of not really caring about
assisted stations.  As a rover, I suppose it would be nice to use APRS and
have all stations be able to find and use the information.  Its not a huge
deal to be though and don't really consider it to be a handicap, nor do I
think it would make a huge difference in the number of contacts I make.

I also disagree that the rules of the ARRL contests are broken.  There are a
few things that I think need tweaked, but wholesale changes just don't seem
needed.  On balance, I think they are pretty good.  I fear that changing
them in any dramatic manner risks loosing the appeal.  That's why I am
neutral on most rule change proposals that I've seen.

As long as we're on the subject of re-taking the VUAC, can somebody tell me
why we don't have a "limited" single operator category?  Rovers and
multi-ops have 4 band station options but single ops don't.  Just a
thought...

73
Steve
K4GUN/R




On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 6:01 PM, Kutzko, Sean, KX9X <kx9x at arrl.org> wrote:

> Hi folks-
>
> After reading Marshall's opinions on contesting philosophy, I thought I'd
> chime in with my own views on this matter.
>
> Before I proceed, let me fire off the disclaimers:
>
> 1) These are merely my opinions and I speak for nobody but myself.
>
> 2) While an active VHF'er and contester, I have never made a QSO above 432
> MHz.
>
> 3) I do not make the rules, I enforce and administer what the Programs and
> Services Committee tell me to.
>
>
> I disagree with the fundamental premise that VHF contesting is different
> from HF contesting. As I see it, the basic premise of radio contesting is to
> see what I, as an operator with a transceiver and antenna, am capable of
> achieving on my own merit, using my own skill set. Using that definition,
> the band on which a radio contest takes place is irrelevant. Yes,
> propagation is different from VHF+ to HF. To me, that is a non-issue. It
> simply means that an operator wishing to do well needs to develop another
> skill set; that is, learning VHF propagation modes.
>
> I know many HF operators --myself included-- who would disagree with
> Marshall's assessment that HF contesting is about finding people as opposed
> to working them. Many an HF multiplier has gone unworked for various
> reasons, even at super-stations; it is not as simple as described. No matter
> if it's 160 meters or 24 GHz, if you don't work the guy, you get zero
> points.
>
> >From my vantage point, the "Thou Shall Not" rules as Marshall calls them
> serve a purpose: they keep the emphasis on keeping a radio contest a radio
> contest, not an internet contest where others do the work of finding
> stations for you. I think "assistance" is a big deal in the VHF world, too:
> K2DRH and K1TEO are perpetual winners in the Single-Op Low Power and
> Single-Op High Power categories respectively, using bands all the way into
> the microwaves, yet they don't use assistance. Last June, K1TEO beat all
> Limited Multioperator entrants and six of the Top Ten Multioperator
> entrants; Multioperator categories get to use "assistance." This is proof to
> me that there is little difference in VHF versus HF contesting; it still
> ultimately comes down to the operator's skill and what they are capable of
> doing with their station, with their own brain. Some in the HF world have
> postulated that assistance is actually a handicap; Single-Operator entries
> without assistance regularly beat the Single-Op Assisted entrants. Based on
> the efforts of K2DRH and K1TEO (and others), perhaps there is truth to that
> postulate in the VHF world as well.
>
> Not everybody will agree with my contesting philosophy. Fair enough;
> there's more than one way to skin a cat. That's why the ARRL rules allow for
> different operating classes. If you want to use spotting assistance to help
> you discover band openings or find out where a rover is, you can do that. If
> you want to see what just you and your radio are capable of doing, you can
> do that, too. We have to walk a tightrope from an administrative standpoint:
> offer sufficient ways to compete in any given event that allows for
> different operating philosophies, but not TOO many, so a contest stays
> competitive and doesn't deteriorate into an Activity Day, with certificates
> and balloons and cookies for everybody. As long as there will be radio
> contesting, there will be some who want to embrace every ounce of technology
> possible, and others that want to be "a boy and his radio."  There is a
> place for both approaches.
>
> If you think something is broken, contact your VUAC Representative and/or
> your ARRL Director and let them know.
>
> See you in June.
>
> 73,
>
> Sean Kutzko KX9X
> Contest Branch Manager
> ARRL - The national association for Amateur Radio
> 225 Main Street
> Newington, CT  06111 USA
> (860) 594-0232
> email: kx9x at arrl.org
>
>