The CQ World Wide 160 Meter DX Caontest.
I would say it should be what the amateur community wants it to be. Of course
hams will compete in any contest just to work some new countries, bust pileups,
run away from stress, or whatever. The Sponsoring Body can obviously configure
the contest as the sponsoring body would like. After all, it takes a massive
amount of time, energy, money to sponsor one. Unfortunately, not enough credit
is given to those who make it possible.
As far as the rules change in the early days from Serial Numbers to RST: All
the things mentioned-faster exchanges, etc. will increase
participation....thrill....well, that is debatable because to Many, maybe most,
the thrill is "Competing". A contest is competing, Maybe the thrill of
competing comprises the motivation of most, I dont think so and hope not. Was
this move "Watering down" the requirements to get more participation in the
earlier days? K5NA gave that answer. If so....You dont need any more
Quantity, You got it now!! You cant get a signal in there edgewise. It sounds
like now is the time to go for Quality! Times Change!
If the entire thrust of the contest is simply the QSO, then at least call it
what it is: a QSO Party. The problem is that the perceived notion is one where
stations in categories and zones are given awards and noteriety for their
skills. Maybe I had it wrong all along. I thought it required skills to build
stations, copy callsigns in pileups/QRN/QRM/Line Noise/and it appeared to me
that guys all over the planet were primarily trying to prove their metal.
Thats just what I got from all those visits to Dayton, online and offline
chatter and club meetings.
I totally understand your(Contest Committee's) point. Signal reports qualify a
QSO for a QSL/Contact. And, a QSO without a signal report would be technically
invalid for a QSL......I hadn't considered that. I'm saying that the Emperor
has no clothes. A signal report without meaning is a pure JOKE. When
999,999,999 contest QSOs out of 1,000,000 are 599 from automated keyers to
maximize efficiency....what does that mean? Get serious now. And don't make
fun of those County Hunters anymore either. It is a hypocrisy to require a
report on a piece of paper to "Confirm" contact and allow participants to
manufacture reports for their self gain to make a higher score in a contest.
This invalidates the reason for requiring a report to "Confirm" a QSO.
Lets get 100 hams in a room and agree to define reports of 339 to 599 on a tape
and then send in another 100 hams to translate the signals into RST reports
when they hear the samples. That may just qualify for the $10,000 prize on
America's Funniest Videos.
If the Ham Radio community wants to call this a contest, make it a valid
contest with integrity and institute measures to help insure that the rules are
such that it's difficult to cheat. Computers can facilitate the rule breakers
and benders-check partials, zone locations, etc......modifying the exchange,
AND using computers to detect cheating can elevate the value of competiting to
win, and expose the cheaters. Amateurs who have been abiding by the rules
would not have a problem with this. Those who have been a little shady would
find a reason to reject the notion, wouldn't they?
If it is skill oriented, call it a Contest. If it is a QSO Party call it that.
I remember the beginning CQWW days when the 160 contest had only a modicum of
participants, makeshift antennas, no noise supression, and a handful of
stations to work. California was a heck of a treat to work from Georgia. It
was a close knit group of amateurs with seemingly high integrity and altruism.
The contest rules have evolved to what it is today to adapt to the sheer
numbers out there...nothing wrong with that. But sounds like the cheating
monster is alive and well. Does anyone want to evolve and deal with that
perception? Does anybody really care? Is the UA6 the only one? I also remember
W1BB who got most of this started. Don't think Mr. Perry was interested in
easy ways to "make" a contact.
I stand by my comments that a change needs to be made. A real and valid and
honest signal report exchanged should be and was created to inform the sender
and receiver of how their equipment is working. Interesting, that in my 50
years of hamming, Dxing, Qsling, contesting,awards, etc. that I have never had
a QSL or QSO crosschecked with RS/T reports. Why are we sending and faking
them? Does the contest committee even look at them and compare them? What is
the reason to invalidate a contact?-Callsign error, time error, RST
error....don't wast time with that one...all are 599......What is the
significance if it is meaningless? I'm getting older but I aint senile and
MENSA aint kicked me out yet.
I believe that there a lot of Manley Men out there contesting their hearts
out...investing money time whatever...risking lives on towers, fooling with
6,000VDC 100,000VRF planning- thinking- inventing-traveling to foreign
countries- to conquer the 160 Frontier. Who would have ever dreamed it would
be possible to work 300+ countries there? These guys are serious. The rules
for The Premier 160M contest in the world, The CQWW should be commensurate with
that. Nothing less. I doubt you will lose more than 10% participation by
requiring some type of exchange other than, or in addition to, RS/T. Let those
guys play somewhere else if its too hard to do. If the cheaters dont want to
cheat and have to work harder, let them stay at home too. Most things worth
having are worth working for.
Get honest about those signal reports. FiNi8 = Five Nine Zero Eight?
What standards to you want? What does it mean? How do you keep the value and
standards high or higher? Does the Lowband community want a QSO Party or a DX
Contest? Whatever that is, speak out, let it happen or don't complain later.
73,
Val
_______________________________________________
Topband mailing list
Topband@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
|