Yep, agree with Terry and the 10m contest analogy.
I've been thinking and saying similar for years now.
Addition of 2 new sub-categories. The ARRL 10 Meter Contest is an example of a
successful split mode contest (SSB Only, CW Only and Mixed-Mode categories). A
similar model can be applied to ARRL VHF contests.
1. "Digital” (one QSO with the same station on the same band using any
recognized Digital mode ONLY).
2. "Mixed-Mode” (one QSO with the same station on the same band using either
Phone/CW and Digital). ie. Mixed-Mode entrants may contact stations for
contest credit once on Phone/CW and once on Digital.
(The "Analog” sub-category remains the same - one QSO on the same band with the
same station on Phone or CW ONLY).
> On 01/13/2025 9:09 PM EST Terry Price <terry@directivesystems.com
> mailto:terry@directivesystems.com> wrote:
>
>
> FT8 has its' place, I can work distant stations that are far less
> equipped that I could on cw and some operators don't operate cw so it's not
> in anyones' best interest to penalize digital modes. It's just that they
> aren't very friendly for passing and they are slower than 2304 on a Sunday
> afternoon when there is a football game on !! Getting folks to move to FT4
> is as hard as getting them to go to SSB. With all the other contests going
> on, splitting weekends doesn't make sense. Keep the points the same, just
> make it like the 10m contest where you can work both analog and digital. I
> still think making the contest 48 hrs and half analog and half digital has
> huge advantages. Get all the passing and easier Q's on analog and the
> squeakers on digital.
>
> Terry Price - W8ZN
> Directive Systems and Engineering
> 703-754-3876
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 12:06 PM stanka1ze--- via NEWSVHF <
> newsvhf@mailman.qth.net mailto:newsvhf@mailman.qth.net> wrote:
>
>
> > My thought was to encourage dx stations to continue to work a dx grid
> > even if he has already logged it. Example: a station in EM96 works a
> > station in FN20 on digital. Without points for EM96 station he would have
> > no incentive to work any other FN20 stations on digital.
> > Question: if you work a station on digital would you be able to scrap the
> > QSO and work him for a higher point value mode like ssb or cw?
> > On Monday, January 13, 2025 at 11:50:13 AM EST, Fred Stefanik <
> > n1dpmfred@gmail.com mailto:n1dpmfred@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > But distance doesn't discourage using digital for non DX contacts
> > Stan....73Fred
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 11:39 AM stanka1ze@aol.com mailto:stanka1ze@aol.com
> > <stanka1ze@aol.com mailto:stanka1ze@aol.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > Interesting Fred, using digital for working dx and only receiving minimal
> > points discourages dx stations from working others once they have logged
> > the grid. How about including a distance incentive?
> > Stan
> > On Monday, January 13, 2025 at 10:24:11 AM EST, Fred Stefanik <
> > n1dpmfred@gmail.com mailto:n1dpmfred@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Greg and all,
> >
> > I would like to propose a modification to what you've proposed....
> > The prime usefulness for digital modes (FT8, MSK144, JT65, Q65) is the
> > ability to pull weak signals from the noise better than could be done
> > without the aid of a PC and software. This makes these modes "preferred"
> > for DX QSO's. The other thing it does as far as FT8 and MSK144 are
> > concerned is it puts all the activity on one frequency "channel" all at the
> > same time so you know where these stations will be. I feel this is a
> > bigger advantage than the benefits of the digital mode itself. In analog
> > we now have the ability to use sites such as ON4KST, N0UK EME, and Ping
> > Jockey to make skeds with stations helping to locate them for QSO's. These
> > too could be used for digital QSO's also. The "abuse" that happens with
> > the digital modes (primarily FT8) and what has caused all this commotion is
> > that a large number of stations seem to gravitate to the FT8 frequencies on
> > 6 and 2 meters as a PRIMARY means of gathering QSO's both near and far.
> > This I feel is because of the "all the fish in one barrel" phenomenon. In
> > fact on 6 meters, for regular non contest operation the band could be wide
> > open with lots of strong signals on 50.313 and there is NOBODY down on
> > 50.125 plus on SSB. It has COMPLETELY taken over 6 meters! So I think
> > from a VHF / UHF contest perspective we need to allow the use of these
> > digital modes, but adjust the scoring to skew it so that this isn't the
> > place to be to work a large number of stations that are (for lack of better
> > terms) "locals", but to use the modes as intended to stretch the distance
> > of DX QSO's. In a contest when you work those DX stations it is a huge
> > benefit to the score as this is the way to substantially increase your grid
> > / multiplier count thereby tremendously increasing your score for working
> > that DX. This is what I feel the "incentive" should be for using the
> > digital modes and not just for making QSO's . To accomplish this my
> > initial proposal that I had floated out there was to leave all the scoring
> > as is by band for points for analog QSO's and keep the multipliers (grids)
> > as is also for all QSO's but to make digital mode QSO's worth zero points.
> > This means that you need to use the digital modes to "hunt new grids /
> > multipliers" making this activity back to what these modes were intended to
> > be used for....DX QSO's. Now I proposed the zero points for digital QSO's
> > but it could be something like 1 for digital, 5 for SSB, 10 for CW, but
> > then what do you do with the points for going higher in frequency? So that
> > would have to be worked out. Maybe you make an overall multiplier for the
> > score based on the number of bands you have submitted QSO's on??? I don't
> > know..... But clearly the goal needs to be to use the modes we have at our
> > disposal for making QSO's and activating the bands. Some people say this
> > is the primary goal. I don't think it is! I think that it is secondary to
> > making our small VHF / UHF community happy and enthusiastic about wanting
> > to get on and use the bands we have and operate in these contests as that's
> > when there's a concentration of activity. If we have a community that does
> > not like the circumstances and therefor does not get on in these contests
> > then guess what ....we are heading VHF UHF contesting down a path of
> > extinction!
> > 73
> > Fred
> > K1FMS
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 8:40 AM Greg Troxel <gdt@lexort.com
> > mailto:gdt@lexort.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > I haven't done VHF contesting seriously for years; I used to be one of
> > > the W1XM operators in the mid/late 80s and early 90s. I am very
> > > sympathetic to the problem of everything turning into FTx.
> > >
> > > This happens at Field Day, too. Either because of my club's culture, or
> > > the rules, we end up with a CW station, SSB station, and digital
> > > station. Long ago the digital station was probably RTTY, and now it's
> > > pretty much FT4. This is an ok outcome. (There's a separate issue,
> > > which is that people use the Internet for time sync, and I think all use
> > > of Internet should be banned at FD because in theory it's an emergency
> > > preparedness exercise.)
> > >
> > >
> > > My idea for VHF contests is to allow one contact per band/mode/station,
> > > so you could work someone on SSB, CW, and a digital mode. (Yes, I know
> > > CW is technically digital, but I mean "a computer mode.) Then, it's
> > > just a question of setting point values to encourage activity. I would
> > > suggest
> > >
> > > 1 FTx
> > > 5 SSB
> > > 10 CW
> > >
> > > This aligns ssb/cw with FD's points, I think (I don't really pay
> > > attention to the contest part; for me it's emergency preparedness and
> > > cookout). But the ssb/cw mix isn't that important; it's setting the
> > > rules so that people who operating only FTx leave massive numbers of
> > > points on the table.
> > >
> > > 73 de n1dam
> > > ______________________________________________________________
> > > NEWSVHF mailing list
> > > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/newsvhf
> > > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > > Post: mailto:NEWSVHF@mailman.qth.net mailto:NEWSVHF@mailman.qth.net
> > >
> > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> > > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> > >
> > >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > NEWSVHF mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/newsvhf
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:NEWSVHF@mailman.qth.net mailto:NEWSVHF@mailman.qth.net
> >
> > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > NEWSVHF mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/newsvhf
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:NEWSVHF@mailman.qth.net mailto:NEWSVHF@mailman.qth.net
> >
> > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> >
> _______________________________________________
> VHFcontesting mailing list
> VHFcontesting@contesting.com mailto:VHFcontesting@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
>
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|