Not only that.
A whole lot of "Category hopping" took place to avoid the competition.
WRTC is fantastic, and it would be even more so, if certain detrimental
factors were eliminated from the qualifying run.
Even in if you compete in a high power category, that's a mix of
participants using the max legal power and others using deca Watts.
That, together with ghost ops, remote RXs, unclaimed assistance, log
padding, phone calls to arrange Qs, cheer leading, etc., would be
eliminated by conducting, one, two or three on-site qualifying events.
I'm sure we all can help MCGA!
73,
Martin LU5DX
P.S. Make Contesting Great Again.
El sáb., 7 jul. 2018 6:20 p. m., Igor Sokolov <ua9cdc@gmail.com> escribió:
> Yes, this was the first time one could qualify using low power.
> Notwithstanding you have to have big antenna farm because even in Low
> power category there were a lot of competitors. And yes, some of those
> who have big stations did bother with doing low power. Tribander and
> wires from the city lot is not enough to qualify for WRTC regardless of
> power.
>
> 73, Igor UA9CDC
>
>
> 07.07.2018 22:03, Jeff Clarke пишет:
> > It's possible to qualify by doing low power. Your score would be
> > compared to others that are doing low power and not the high power
> > scores. If you do that you won't have to compete again the "big gun"
> > stations in your region. Plus you aren't getting any reduction in
> > score ( getting the same number of points same as HP SO guys) like
> > someone who did Multi-Ops. I really doubt someone who has a big
> > station would want to bother with doing low power.
> >
> > If I'm not mistaken Julio, AD4Z, who is one of the team leaders in our
> > region (NA-002) did this and qualified.
> >
> > Jeff KU8E
> >
> >
> > On 7/6/2018 11:11 PM, Timothy Coker via CQ-Contest wrote:
> >> I think what’s most interesting is the guys I know who typically win
> >> don’t spend a lot of time complaining... they spend a lot of time
> >> working at what makes them winners.
> >> I can also think of some people who won/win that don’t have deep
> >> pockets at all.
> >> Some of the best operators don’t actually have big stations. Not
> >> taking away from the big station owners at all, as some of them are
> >> great operators themselves. However, many are willing to let the
> >> latest up and coming great operators take their station seats to show
> >> what can be done.
> >> It makes sense to me because it takes a lot of time and effort to
> >> either build or work to pay for others to build something expensive.
> >> That same time is thus not spent on honing operating skills.
> >> Very similar to how many athletes aren’t rich until after (and not
> >> for all) they have worked so very hard to win and are given noteriety.
> >> If a guy wants to remote or travel into my area and he beats me, so
> >> be it... time for me to get better. Or maybe I don’t want to put in
> >> the same operating skills effort that he did and thus I’ll just hope
> >> he doesn’t return.
> >> Competition is great... it shows how hard we are willing to work, or
> >> not.
> >> Tim / N6WIN.
> >>
> >> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
> >>
> >>
> >> On Friday, July 6, 2018, 14:45, Jim via CQ-Contest
> >> <cq-contest@contesting.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> I have a somewhat different perspective, being an Ohio snowbird who
> >> spends half the year in Florida. As a practical matter I could not
> >> qualify without a lot of travel or remote operating from W8. And I’m
> >> not that stupid to head north from Florida in February :-)
> >>
> >> I had my shot at WRTC in 2014 (as N1U with partner K9NW), but I
> >> didn’t compete to qualify for 2018, and don’t see me trying to
> >> qualify for future WRTCs, so don’t take these comments as being self
> >> serving.
> >>
> >> If a W6 resident wants to operate from W1, let him do so, comparing
> >> his scores with other W1 entrants. And conversely, if a guy living in
> >> W1 is crazy enough to want to operate CQWW from W6, thinking the
> >> qualifying competition there might be less, why stop him? Again,
> >> compare his W6 score with other W6 scores, and let the WRTC
> >> qualifying points go into his home W1 account.
> >>
> >> So long as a person is a legitimate resident of his qualifying area,
> >> why stop him from operating from anywhere in the world, whether in
> >> person or remotely? I don’t have a problem to allow someone like
> >> LZ4AX to qualify from W3, but I would not let people become
> >> “Africans” solely by virtue of a bunch of operating from zone 33.
> >>
> >>
> >> 73 - Jim K8MR
> >>
> >> p.s. Keep in mind the motto of the Florida Contest Group: Sooner or
> >> later, you’ll be one of us!
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Jul 6, 2018, at 4:16 PM, WW3S <ww3s@zoominternet.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> A west coast ham, operating a remote station with antennas in Maine,
> >>> should be competing as if he/she were physically in Maine.
> >>>
> >>> Sent from my iPad
> >>>
> >>>> On Jul 5, 2018, at 11:56 PM, David Siddall <hhamwv@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> A W6 ham resident in California that operates a station on the east
> >>>> coast,
> >>>> whether by physical or remote means, could not qualify to be a team
> >>>> leader
> >>>> for the WRTC2018. Rule 7.5 - 7.7, subject to Rule 6.2.
> >>>>
> >>>> 73, Dave K3ZJ
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 5:52 PM, Carol Richards <n2mm@comcast.net>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I agree....where you operate _from_ should determine what region you
> >>>>> compete in. A W6 in California operating a remote station on the
> >>>>> East coast
> >>>>> should not be grouped with other East coast stations to qualify
> >>>>> for WRTC.
> >>>>> This remote category is getting out of hand.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Carol
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
|