CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Putting the spoon into the pot: WPX - who is onfirst?

To: "Randy Thompson K5ZD" <k5zd@charter.net>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Putting the spoon into the pot: WPX - who is onfirst?
From: "Albert Crespo" <f5vhj@orange.fr>
Reply-to: Albert Crespo <f5vhj@orange.fr>
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 04:50:50 -0000
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
CQ's policy to spread the plaque winners around so that one station does not 
win multiple plaques is a good one. The purpose of specific class plaques 
like a North American plaque is rendered meaningless  if the world leader 
also happens to be in  North America and wins both the plaques. If you win 
one plaque in a contest , that should be enough . You should be magnanimous 
enough to let someone else share in the distribution of plaques. It does not 
cheapen the achievement of the other operator who receives a plaque who 
happens to have a lesser score then then the world leader nor does it take 
away anything from the higher class operator.
This is amateur radio where sportsmanship also incorporates some restraint 
on claiming the spoils of a competition.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Randy Thompson K5ZD" <k5zd@charter.net>
To: <kr2q@optimum.net>; <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2009 6:05 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Putting the spoon into the pot: WPX - who is 
onfirst?


>
> This is not an issue specific to the WPX Contest.  I believe all CQ 
> Contests
> (WW, RTTY, WPX, 160) follow this convention of only awarding one plaque 
> per
> entry.
>
> The goal of the plaque program is to motivate and provide recognition.
>
> There are 3 "levels" of plaques (World, Continent, Country).  If an entry
> was allowed to win multiple plaques, then one great effort from an
> advantaged location could take all 3 levels and leave other strong efforts
> unrecognized.  Perhaps all the plaques should not say "Winner", but again,
> that's they way it has been done historically.  The policy has been to
> always award an entry with the highest level plaque they were eligible 
> for.
>
> I am interested in hearing from the contest community if this policy 
> should
> be changed (specifically for the WPX Contest).
>
> What we have done for WPX in 2009 is change the definition of the North
> America plaques so that they only apply to stations outside the USA and
> Canada.  This accomplishes two desirable results: 1) it encourages 
> activity
> from North American stations outside USA/Canada, and 2) the winner of the
> USA or Canada for a category will always be the winner of the country
> plaque.
>
> The list of plaques currently sponsored for the upcoming WPX contests can 
> be
> seen at http://www.cqwpx.com/plaques.htm.  (We are still looking for a few
> more sponsors.)
>
> To follow the example of my friend Jim White (K4OJ - SK), it is only 27 
> more
> days until the CQ WPX Phone Contest!
>
>
> Randy Thompson, K5ZD
>
> Director - CQ WPX Contest
>
> email: k5zd@cqwpx.com
> web: www.cqwpx.com
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
>> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
>> kr2q@optimum.net
>> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 11:37 PM
>> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
>> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Putting the spoon into the pot: WPX -
>> who is on first?
>>
>> Just got my March 2009 CQ mag with the cw WPX results.
>>
>> YIPPIE!!  I won a trophy!!
>>
>> BUT WAIT A MINUTE.....what's this I see?
>>
>> TI5N wins for the world (congrats) and get the WORLD trophy.
>>
>> I win for USA, but since TI5N got the WORLD trophy and now
>> I'm 2nd place in N.A., I get the NA trophy.  But I didn't win
>> NA, I won USA.  So why would I get the NA trophy?
>>
>> And ELSE do I see?  Because I got the N.A. trophy, N7IR, who
>> is 2nd place USA, (an amazing feat from AZ) wins the USA trophy.
>>
>> HUH??????
>>
>> This made no sense to me 30 years ago in CQWW when W1WY
>> thought that it would be equitable to not only do this sort
>> of thing, but make the previous year's winner ineligible to
>> win the trophy again.  So what happened?  Station "A" won in
>> year 19xx.  In year 19xx+1, they won again, but could bit win
>> the trophy, so station "B" got the trophy....and the trophy
>> was engraved with the word WINNER.  But it gets better.  In
>> year 19xx+2, Station A again won, Station B again came in
>> 2nd, but since they were both "ineligible," Station C got the
>> trophy, which again was engrave with WINNER.  This nonsense
>> was stopped long ago.  The winner is the winner, period.
>>
>> So what would I do in this case?  TI5N wins the world AND
>> wins N.A.  He should get TWO trophies.  This concept of
>> "being fair" works well in kindergarten and first grade...not
>> contesting.
>>
>> OK...taking a step back and now handing the spoon off.
>>
>> de Doug KR2Q
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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

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