K4RO Kirk Pickering wrote: "Over the last few years I've been starting to
see the light"
Not too much that I read or see, causes me to do a "self evaluation", but
the presentation by Jay, WS7I, "Ten Sure Fire Ways to Improve QSO Rate in
RTTY Contests, http://www.rttycontesting.com/dayton03/ws7i_doc.html caused
me to do so!
Seldom, if ever, do I review previous contest efforts, except to see how
many Q's were made, and what was my score. My main interest is to improve on
"last year's" score, and other than having "last year's" score available,
nothing else is done. I have never asked anyone for their logs, as usually I
'm only interested in my own score, not theirs. I pay little, if any
attention to the sunspot activity. If there are contacts to be made, I'll
try and make them. If not, maybe I'll go fishing. I have no idea what a "QSO
curve" is, and I will usually start on the highest band available, and work
down.
I can't recall ever starting a contest with a definite "time off" planned.
If/when a contest starts a 0000Z, I will operate until I get too sleepy to
do so, then go to bed. As an "early riser", I'm usually back on the air by
0900Z. My favorite contests are the short (less than 24 hours) ones, or ones
that "define" when everyone will operate and when everyone will be off.
Ah ha, found something that I do! I have all my buffers programmed prior to
starting, and have several variations for most, depending on propagation and
other situations.
My antenna system (TriBand @ 55 feet, 2 element 40 @ 50 feet, inverted vee @
50 feet) allows me to practically "work all those I can print". I have no
room for other antennas, so "redesigning" my antenna system is not
practical. Being located between the South and Heartland, I just try and
work what is available.
What really doesn't apply to my contest approach: "Contesting should be hard
work, are you working hard enough"? Most likely, no! If/when contesting
becomes work instead of fun, I'll go fishing! With advances in technology,
and being technically "challenged", I feel I'm unsuited for much more that
what I have, and I "can live with that"! I have had to change my own
definition of "winning". Winning, for me, is "having done the best I could,
with what I have, and had fun doing it"!
The part of the conclusion, "good operators work hard during the contest,
and above all else, they have fun", certainly seems like a contradictory
statement?
I, maybe, admire the stations that devote "whatever is necessary" to attain
a "winning" score, but I have no intention of completely changing my
lifestyle, in order to participate in a contest! I assure you that "there is
life after 60", and I plan on doing "whatever is necessary" to assure myself
of "life after 100".
My "self reevaluation" conclusion: "I'm not really a contester, just one, of
many, that enjoy the competition".
C'Ya, Shelby - K4WW
----- Original Message -----
From: "K4RO Kirk Pickering" <k4ro@k4ro.net>
To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 11:15 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Competitor Friendly Contesting
> Ed N1UR wrote:
> > To me, CQ WW is like the Boston or New York (pick your local big city)
> > Marathon. Should I tell the organizers that they should open up a 5K,
> > 40+ category of it just because I know I will never "go the distance"
> > in a marathon? No. They would rightly say "Run in something matched
> > up with your level of ability and determination".
>
> Over the last few years I've been starting to see the light here,
> and am beginning to feel the same way about the big DX contests.
> Just because I feel that I am competitive doesn't mean that I
> somehow deserve a playing field more suited to my advantages.
> If I want to win, I must either create those advantages myself,
> or quit complaining that I don't have them. It takes resources
> and determination, whether building a superstation or paying for
> a plane ticket to travel to one. It's taken me years to accept this.
>
> I've been reading all of the NCJ's, starting from the beginning
> (something I highly recommend to anyone interested in contesting.)
> The resources necessary to compete at the top levels has always
> been pretty high. Twenty and even thirty years ago, folks were
> complaining about super stations, guest ops, and the like. Some
> of the very ops who complained about "hired guns" back then are
> now hosting hired guns at their own super stations. What changed?
>
> I suspect they figured out that this is how the game is played at
> the highest levels. And like the big marathons, there is nothing
> inappropriate about the level of committment required to win.
> Like it or not, DX contests are won by great ops from great stations
> in great locations. This would be case no matter how the rules or
> point definitions were defined. Isn't this how it should be?
>
> There does seem to be a widening gap over the years between the
> superstation / hired gun scores and the owner-operator scores.
> Typical top ten listings appear to contain more of these pseudo
> team efforts with each passing year, particularly in DX contests.
> Even the SS, NAQP and Sprint Top Ten lists are more and more
> dominated by guest-op efforts than in years past. That's fine
> once that we accept that this is how contests are won. I am in
> awe of the skills of the operators and station builders who
> make these scores possible. Even more awe-inspiring to me are
> the rare ones who single-op competitively from their own stations.
> These are my contesting heroes.
>
> The biggest "problem" if there is one, is staying in the game long
> enough to understand how the contesting game has evolved to this point.
> Many folks get discouraged before they've had a chance to understand
> that the folks at the top typically climbed and scratched their way
> up there. They don't understand the amount of work involved perfecting
> SO2R techniques. They don't know about the countless forgettable
> losing efforts that preceeded the big wins. It might have been
> N5KO who essentially said (paraphrasing) "new folks can't understand
> or appreciate what the masters are doing or why." I personally
> became very disillusioned with contesting several years ago for
> these very reasons. It took me a while to understand that I enjoyed
> the operating immensely regardless of the outcome. I learned to choose
> my battles carefully. I now have a better understanding of what is
> possible from my station. I'm a lot less frustrated and disappointed
> as a result. I've even found a contest or two that I can win from home.
> I've traveled for contest DXpeditions and tasted the thrill of world-
> class competing as a team. I'm hooked on contesting for life now.
>
> Perhaps contesting is just as it should be. If an operator is going to
> let a little discouragement stop them, well then they probably don't
> deserve to be winning contests, big or small. I wonder if there is a way
> to describe the contesting scene to newcomers so that they don't wind up
> early on with a "what's the point" attitude? Ultimately I guess it comes
> down to finding satisfaction in the pursuit itself, regarless of the
score.
> The point is, we get out of this game exactly what we put into it. I
don't
> want to establish hanidcap systems (although I am a big fan of regional
> score reporting.) I don't want to shorten the marathons (or DX contests)
> just because I am unwilling or unable to go the distance. Folks do it
every
> year because they are able, willing, and determined. They deserve to win.
> More power to them.
>
> 73
>
> -Kirk K4RO
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|