That's a tautology--not a reason.
73, Alan/K6SRZ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve London" <n2icarrl@gmail.com>
To: "Alan M. Eshleman" <doctore@well.com>
Cc: cq-contest@contesting.com
Sent: Friday, February 1, 2013 12:14:08 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Have NCCC and PVRC ruined SS?
Because it's simply not going to happen. If you want an SS-like contest
where you can work stations on every band, then the NAQP is for you.
73,
Steve, N2IC
On 02/01/2013 01:11 PM, Alan M. Eshleman wrote:
> Why are they off the table?
>
> 73, Alan/K6SRZ
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steve London"<n2icarrl@gmail.com>
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Sent: Friday, February 1, 2013 8:52:23 AM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Have NCCC and PVRC ruined SS?
>
> To me, it's not the points contributed, it's the number of active
> stations that matter. I'll define "active" as those stations who put in
> 10 or more hours.
>
> As the author of the upcoming Phone SS writeup, I can say that it was
> very disappointing to see the drop in activity in 2012. The decreased
> emphasis by some clubs was a significant component of this drop.
>
> What can we do to increase activity ? Making drastic changes, such as
> allowing the same station to be worked on each band, are off-the-table.
>
> 73,
> Steve, N2IC
>
> On 01/31/2013 01:38 PM, Bill Haddon wrote:
>> Let's look at some actual numbers to assess the extent to which NCCC's not
>> highlighting Sweepstakes influenced the Sweepstakes, over-all:
>>
>> For 2011 (one of the years cited by the K3KU message):
>>
>> Total points in Sweepstakes CW: ~85,000,000
>> Points from PVRC: 10,113,000
>> Points from NCCC: 7,970,000
>>
>> Suppose NCCC had emphasized SS and that NCCC tied PVRC:
>> Increase in Sweepstakes scores under this scenario: ~2.6% of total
>> SS CW points.
>>
>> It does appear that NCCC contributed a bit less in 2012 (can't tell easily
>> since the CW and Phone scores are not individually summed in the NCCC
>> database), but I'd guess NCCC generated about 6,000,000 CW points (but many
>> members' scores went to MLDXCC). So there might be about a 5% impact on
>> overall Sweepstakes activity from our failure to stress the Sweepstakes in
>> 2012. A relatively small effect.
>>
>> 73 Bill n6zfo
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|