VHFcontesting
[Top] [All Lists]

[VHFcontesting] What is accomplished?

To: vhfcontesting@contesting.com
Subject: [VHFcontesting] What is accomplished?
From: James Duffey <JamesDuffey@comcast.net>
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 18:47:20 -0700
List-post: <vhfcontesting@contesting.com">mailto:vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
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@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>