[VHFcontesting] Digital Modes (FT8) in January 2019 Contest

[jimk8mr at aol.com]

I've not been following this thread closely, so forgive me if this has already been suggested:
Allow QSOs for each mode, with mode broadly defined as all digital, or all analog. I.e. work a guy once on CW or SSB  or FM voice, (or cross mode), and once using any digital mode.
Let the "other" mode be viewed as addition, not subtraction.


73  -  Jim  K8MR





 
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Waite <waisean at gmail.com>
To: Dave Miller <ve7hr at ve7hr.ca>
Cc: JamesDuffey <jamesduffey at comcast.net>; Paul Kiesel <k7cw at yahoo.com>; VHF Contesting <vhfcontesting at contesting.com>
Sent: Wed, Jun 19, 2019 5:07 pm
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] Digital Modes (FT8) in January 2019 Contest

One idea I was thinking about. In some of the big HF contests there are
unofficial overlays. Other groups make a super set of the rules and people
can compete in those categories.

For instance, the ARRL rules stay as they are. Another group starts to
support the "No Digital Modes" Overlay and then people can apply that. Or
whatever. Competition is the same, but people can cut out parts they don't
like. Maybe that ends up fragmenting the contests more but a) we're not
going to see FT8/FT4 go away for a while (I'm okay with this) and b) this
may actually end up driving more people to be on SSB/CW, which in turn coud
pull more people onto SSB/CW.

Sean WA1TE

On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 4:59 PM Dave Miller <ve7hr at ve7hr.ca> wrote:

> Nomex suit on
> I think the simple solution is to make FT8 contacts worth 0.001 pts per
> QSO.
> Keep 6M in contest as when it opens it one of few wasy to get mults when
> you live on BC
> Solves all problem.
> Nomex suit off
> Dave
> VE7HR
>
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:44 AM Paul Kiesel via VHFcontesting <
> vhfcontesting at contesting.com> wrote:
>
> >  I've finally come to the realization that digital is here to stay. I
> hate
> > that not so many SSB and CW contacts can be made now during the contests.
> > It's not that they are superior to FT8, but that operating in the contest
> > is a hell of a lot less fun without them.
> >
> > In recent years' June contests, I've competed in the Single Op/High Power
> > category against all others in the same category. But, I've operated
> solely
> > on 50 MHz because it's a challenge to beatothers who run many or all of
> the
> > higher bands. It used to bother me a lot that I could beat others both in
> > number of QSOs and number of multipliers and still not win because of the
> > points advantages given for use of bands 222 MHz and above. Now, I
> welcome
> > this challenge, even though I know I will not win in the category. But,
> the
> > guys running all the high bands during the contest know they are
> competing
> > against me. This makes operating on the higher bands an advantageous
> > opportunity to my competition. The result of this is that they will make
> as
> > many contacts as they can on all available bands while being careful to
> not
> > neglect 50 MHz. Planning and coordination are important for them.
> >
> > This is not the first time that people have suggested eliminating 50 MHz
> > from the June contest. I don't think dumping six meters is going to solve
> > anything, but make things worse. Rather, havingall VHF and higher bands
> as
> > relevant in the contest is the way to go.
> > What bothers me more than the reduced use of SSB and CW in the contests
> is
> > the fact that the digital modes are restricted to audio bandwidth zones.
> > This could be considered an efficient use of spectrum, but actually the
> > conditions during a contest or band opening in that narrow a zone are
> > nothing less than horrid. All one needs is one strong station in the
> other
> > FT8 sequence to ruin any possibility to compete or decode weak DX. And
> this
> > problem is not going to go away by trying to enforce which stations call
> on
> > even and which call on odd.
> >
> > It may be time to think about rearranging the rules, but eliminating 50
> > MHz from the June contest would be a bad mistake. It would be better to
> > consider either limiting the number of contacts that can be made using a
> > single mode or by maybe having a suite of frequencies wherein FT8 QSOs
> > could be made. As an example 50.310 to 50.320.
> >
> > The June contest is unique and should be kept the way it is as much as
> > possible. You shouldn't remove a band from the contest because people are
> > choosing to use it!
> > 73, Paul K7CW
> >
> >
> >