I have asked Dan Henderson this same question and have the following
information to provide you.
It is NOT in the spirit of the competition for any club to "LIMIT" the
number of participants in a club to only 10 for purposes of winning a
category.
It is NOT in the spirit of the competition for any club to have more than
the number of participants in a category and then only submit the top
scorers as club members in the contest.
As the Kansas City DX Club has slowly revived, I recognize that we may on
occasion have less than 10 entries in a contest and if we do.. we will be
allowed to under the rules (if all those who participated are within the 35
mile radius) enter a "LOCAL CLUB" category. However if one memebr is outside
the 35 mile circle or if 11 members participate in the contest, then we will
be expected to enter the Medium club category.
I agree with the basis and interpretation of the rules. It would be an
aweful shame for a club to put reigns on its membership for the Glory of a
few, even if it does promote the club.
Tom Baugh
AE9B
----- Original Message -----
From: <Dave_Hoaglin@abtassoc.com>
To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Cc: <kharker@cs.utexas.edu>; <yccc@yccc.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 1:02 PM
Subject: [CQ-Contest] More on club competition
> I would like to respond to yesterday's posting by Ken, WM5R.
>
> > Suppose that the YCCC decided, for the ARRL International DX Contest,
that
> > it would like to win the local club category of the Club Competition.
> > It submits a list of eligible members that happens to have only ten
members
> > on it, all of whom live within some 35 mile radius of one another.
Would
> > this fly? I don't think so. That sounds a lot like "the club has
> > manipulated its number of entries to fall into a lower classification."
>
> I'm not sure what to conclude from this example. It is highly
hypothetical and describes a form
> of manipulation different from the examples in Ken's op-ed piece. In
practice, I believe, a club is
> supposed (perhaps in registering as an ARRL-affiliated club) to designate
the center and radius
> of its territory (or its ARRL section, if it has chosen that approach).
So YCCC would have declared
> its 175-mile radius and could not change that to 35 miles. The rules say
that the club "must submit
> a list of all club members eligible to compete for the club (not a club
roster) and which level
> (unlimited, medium, local) they wish to enter for each competition within
30 days after the contest."
> So submitting an incomplete list would be a violation of the rules.
Submission of logs is up to the
> individual member, who "must clearly indicate the club name in the
Cabrillo file header." If a number
> of members submit logs naming the club, but are not on the club's list of
eligible members, the
> "manipulation" would be obvious.
>
> BTW, I think it would be a good idea to have each club's list of eligible
members, and the details of
> how its club score was computed, available for public inspection on the
ARRL website. This is a
> simple matter of transparency.
>
> > In practice, the ARRL Contest Branch has used the membership of the
club,
> > not just the list of "eligible" members, to determine the category in
which
> > each club participates in the Club Competition. If a Local club has a
member
> > or two living outside of the club radius or ARRL section, but they do
not
> > contest (because, perhaps, this is a general interest ham radio club)
that
> > club might not have any trouble being considered "Local." But once some
of
> > those distant club members begin actively contesting, or helping out at
a
> > multi-op, even if the club isn't claiming them as "eligible," at some
point
> > the ARRL Contest Branch can decide that the only reason they aren't
being
> > declared "eligible" is that the club is manipulating its entries to fall
into
> > a lower classification. This exact thing has happened in recent years.
> > I think this poses an awful dilemma for a club member in that position.
>
> I am not able to speak for the ARRL Contest Branch. The rules say that
the category
> (for unlimited and medium, at least) is determined by the number of
entries submitted.
> From what I can see, this is what the Contest Branch does in practice.
For example, from
> 1992 through 2001 the number of logs submitted for YCCC in the ARRL
160-Meter Contest
> ranged from 17 to 36, and YCCC's club score was listed in the medium
category in each
> of those years. I, personally, do not think that is appropriate. YCCC is
definitely an
> unlimited club, and it should always compete in that category. If it
can't muster the 51 entries
> for a particular contest, that's its problem. (I know that ARRL DX and
CQWW DX attract far
> more interest within YCCC than other contests.) I don't know how the
Contest Branch handles
> the situation in which a club declares itself to be competing in one
category, but its number of
> entries places it in a different category. The rules do not resolve this
apparent conflict. It
> would probably be appropriate to use the higher of the two categories.
>
> I don't understand your example involving a Local club. If those members
reside outside the
> club's territory, the club is simply not allowed to claim them as
eligible, even though they are
> otherwise members in goodstanding. The club would (as mentioned above)
indicate its
> intention to compete as a Local club, and that would be the end of it. If
those distant club
> members begin to contest actively at their home stations, their scores
would not count for the
> Local club. The situation gets murky, however, if those same distant
members help out in
> multi-ops within the Local club's territory. You have a point there. If
the club consistently declares
> itself to be a Local club, contest after contest and year after year,
their participation would be
> within the rules. Whether it is strictly ethical may be another matter.
But if the same club
> sometimes declared itself to be Local and sometimes Medium (say, to count
those members'
> scores at their home stations), its status as a Local club might
reasonably be questioned.
> I don't, however, see a dilemma for the individual members. The officers
of the club have to take
> the responsibility. You have identified a gray area. I see no benefit in
trying to remove all gray
> areas through highly prescriptive rules. Instead, I would hope that
discussions like this lead to a
> consensus on what constitues ethical behavior. Then we have to count on
the individual clubs
> and their members to behave ethically.
>
> 73, Dave K1HT k1ht@arrl.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|