Having read many great posts about WPX from guys like KQ2M, KL7RA K5NA
and now VK7GN, I must say I am simply in awe.
I haven't operated a WPX contest since the late 70's. My trip to 6Y1V
next week will be my first WPX contest since the 70's, and I am honored
to have great contesters such as K6AM, WE9V and W4PA joining me. It
should be quite interesting to see the results after hearing comments
such as those from VK7GN about major contest stations not having a
significant advantage from normally geographically advantaged locations.
I am not certain when the WPX contest began, but I have the 101'st WPX
certificate from my first 2 months as a Novice so I cannot imagine it
was much before 1976. I don't have any details about the history of rule
changes over the years, other than what is posted in this thread. My
point is, that I believe I have a unique perspective when reading both
sides of this debate.
I can literally feel the passion emanating from each of your posts. Many
are very well written and express excellent points, both pro and con. In
fact, at this point in time, I couldn't even begin to choose a side from
30 hours versus 36 hours. So, you may wonder, why I am posting at all?
It's quite simple actually. First, I wanted to let everyone
(particularly those with a vested interest in the results of a rule
change) know that for someone whom has little knowledge about the
difference this rule makes, it is very difficult to be convinced one way
or another. I also wanted to make it clear that not everyone with little
experience about this issue was choosing sides, or even able to choose a
side, as one person mentioned in a previous post.
I must say, I am enjoying the debate and I am learning a lot from it. I
wish to thank everyone whom is participating in the debate for providing
me so much valuable information.
I look forward to more great comments about this interesting topic.
David ~ KY1V
__________________________________________________________
The only thing that has made me really angry in contesting was the
decision to go from 30 to 36 hours in WPX. It was a change which was
lobbied for by a tiny minority of contesters who already had an
advantage through geography.
When I challenged the decision I was told it was taken because the
Contest peditioners were complaining and we should encourage these extra
mults. This was, of course even then a load of baloney as the WPX was,
and is even more now, a run contest.
The fact is that the elite of contesting did not like that the standard
process of finding the right island near the equator and close to
Europe, USA or Japan sometimes did not work in WPX. People were getting
into the top ten from outlandish places like the South Pacific or Alaska
or Asiatic Russia. Because they got their strategies right!
In VK, even in the good times we rarely get 30 hours when you can run at
a decent rate and we never ever get 36 hours.
It is a question of different scoring systems in different contests.
KL7RA correctly states:-
"My opinion is a rule change should be for the good of everyone. A
rule change that benefits "most" is probably okay but a rule change
that allows a bigger advantage for some while forcing a bigger
disadvantage on others is not a good rule change."
This was not a good rule change.
Those who argue that 36 gives more activity should note that between
KL7RA and VK7GN losing interest in WPX you have lost at least 3000 q's
of activity. I know of plenty of other keen WPX contesters who now just
get on to have a bit of fun.
As for the nonsense about operating 30 or 36. I certainly operated every
one of the 30 hours and I have sometimes operated 36 but I do it with
less enthusiasm. At 30 I had a chance to match it with everyone. At 36 I
will always be down in the pack. Reality!
We must escape the attempts to turn all contests into who can run the
fastest for 48 hours. That way lies the death of contesting as there is
no place for those who are geographically challenged and not able to
travel.
Bring back the power of multipliers and time strategies.
Martin VK7GN
-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Richard L. King
Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 5:11 AM
To: Randy Thompson; cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Move WPX Back to 30 Hours?
I know what you are saying Randy and I respectably disagree that this
is really needed. I don't think that reducing the hours of a contest
will do much to balance the competition level of that contest. I
think it would just be a shorter contest.
And I admit, I always see the reduction of operating time and sleep
deprivation as a "hidden" motivation for time limit changes.
I believe that fewer hours will mean less fun no matter how much more
competitive I might feel in the WPX. I contest because it is fun to
contest. I certainly don't do it to win anything. If that were the
case, I would collect stamps instead.
All contests are not created equal for everyone. Maybe what we need
is a Stew Perry style contest that is world-wide and all bands.
Getting additional points based on the distance of the QSO is the
best equalizer I can think of.
Richard - K5NA
At 17:36 3/22/2008, Randy Thompson wrote:
>At no time did any of the advocates of 30 hours make the argument that
it
>was due to needing sleep. All of the examples were around enhancing
the
>competitive balance between various parts of the world.
>
>Randy, K5ZD
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
> > [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> > Richard L. King
> > Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2008 2:23 PM
> > To: Jim Neiger; cq-contest@contesting.com
> > Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Move WPX Back to 30 Hours?
> >
> > I agree with Jim on this one.
> >
> > When we start cutting back on contest time to fit our aging
> > sleep cycle, it is admitting that the end of contesting is at hand.
> >
> > When I hit 100 years of age, I want the WPX to still be a 36
> > hour contest and not a one hour contest to fit my physical needs.
> >
> > Of course, I am hoping that there will be another generation
> > of contesters to follow us. If we know for sure that
> > contesting is going to die out with us, then you can make all
> > contests an evening's sprint and I will find another hobby.
> > Maybe I will start running Marathons (Unless they get
> > shortened for me too).
> >
> > 73, Richard - K5NA
> >
> >
> >
> > At 22:51 3/21/2008, Jim Neiger wrote:
> > >And I would like to see this contest go back to 48 hours.
> > >
> > >o Contests are for operating
> > >
> > >o Sleeping is for non-contesters
> > >
> > >o Bands are for congesting
> > >
> > >At my house, Trey was always fondly known as "The Kid", and
> > we tried to
> > >treat him just like one of our children. Now he's starting
> > to sound like
> > >the rest of the OF's who can no longer 'cut the mustard'...
> > Let's see,
> > >Trey-ster, was it 1999 that you were No. 1 SO/AB from HC8
> > and wasn't
> > >that also a new WR?? Surely you could operate the entire 48
> > hours....
> > >What happened?
> > >
> > >Gads, in 30 years when I hit the Century mark, I sure hope
> > that there
> > >will still be some of you young guys around to work.
> > >
> > >Vy 73
> > >
> > >Jim Neiger N6TJ
> > >
> > >
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > >From: "Trey Garlough" <trey@kkn.net>
> > >To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> > >Sent: Friday, March 21, 2008 7:59 AM
> > >Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Move WPX Back to 30 Hours?
> > >
> > >
> > > > Randy has summarized the situation very well.
> > > >
> > > > I think the 30-hour SOAB WPX format was very good, and I
> > still think
> > > > that the new 36-hour format is a mistake. I would love
> > to see the
> > > > contest go back to the 30-hour format -- it was the
> > quintessential
> > > > world wide contest for "medium guns."
> > > >
> > > > Anyone who has been in the contesting game for a long time will
> > > > recognize the following fact: The best ops with the best
> > stations in
> > > > the best locations tend to win contests. There is not
> > much mystery
> > > > to this aspect of contesting.
> > > >
> > > > o The beauty of the 30-hour format is that it gives the best ops
> > > > with the best stations in the best locations less time to
assert
> > > > these advantages over everyone else. This makes the race
closer
> > > > and more exciting.
> > > >
> > > > o Because the big guns spend fewer hours on the air, the
> > bands are
> > > > less congested and this gives the medium guns more space to
> > > > establish themselves.
> > > >
> > > > o Having to pick what you think your best 30 hours will be
> > > > introduces an interesting aspect of strategy that is not
> > present in most contests.
> > > >
> > > > o It's ok for contests to be different. There are plenty
> > of 48-hour
> > > > contests available for guys who feel limited by the
> > 30-hour format.
> > > >
> > > > Not sure what else to say. This horse was beaten dead 10
> > years ago
> > > > -- would love to see it come back to life!
> > > >
> > > > --Trey, N5KO/HC8N
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > K5ZD writes:
> > > >> History has shown that the shorter time period enables
> > more people
> > > >> to be competitive from more places around the world.
> > For example,
> > > >> from W6, it is more likely to find 30 good hours that include
> > > >> Europe or JA propagation than it is to find 36 hours.
> > Where from
> > > >> W1, we have 40+ hours of good prop to Europe. By limiting to
30
> > > >> hours, both the W1 and W6 ops have the same amount of rate
> > > >> opportunities to work with.
> > > >>
> > > >> The biggest complaint against 30 hours is that there is a lot
of
> > > >> time where you may be wanting to operate, yet can't.
> > This tends to
> > > >> drive a lot of activity into the first 24 hours and then
> > leave the
> > > >> bands a little emptier on day 2.
> > > >>
> > > >> As a side note, the WPX RTTY contest has kept the 30
> > hour limit. I
> > > >> am not sure what prompted the increase from 30 to 36
> > hours. Based
> > > >> on comments over the years, the guys who are on
> > expeditions or in
> > > >> high rate locations tend to favor the longer operating
> > time. The
> > > >> guys in less advantage areas have voted by giving up on
> > the contest
> > > >> and so their comments have diminished.
> > > >>
> > > >> Randy, K5ZD
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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
>
>_______________________________________________
>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
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|