In my opinion, the idea that a VHF QSO party participant might abuse the 4 band
rules is overblown.
Let's say that you intend to operate the four low bands, but 1 hour into the
contest your 222 rig fails and cannot be repaired. To salvage the contest you
fire up your 1296 equipment and run the rest of the contest without 222. I
don't believe that such a predicament should be outlawed.
However, the log checking robot would have a difficult time with fair log
checking unless the 222 QSOs are submitted.
Even if someone wants to operate on 5 bands and select the best four later, who
is harmed by that? I wouldn't want to waste my time on a fifth band, but that
would be my decision, not any unwritten "ethics" rules.
73, Fred K2TR
aa4zz@aol.com wrote:
?I know of no time (at least here in the SE) where a 1296 score would ever
approach the score of? well equipped 222 station. I also think a pass from 1296
to a lower band very unlikely and certainly not common enough to significantly
effect scores.
?? For us at AA4ZZ 1296 is run just to help?others and frankly if it affects
our score, it is to lower it, because of the lost time and focus from the other
bands.
73 Paul AA4ZZ
Allowing a "limited multi" station with more than four bands to operate
the contest on all of their available bands opens the door for "cherry
picking" the best four bands after the contest is over for their limited
multi-op entry. For example, 50/144/432 are usually the best three, but
operating both 222 and 1.2G during the contest and picking the best band
and the "fourth" is unfair, and is in no way within the intent of the
rules. In addition, to be fair such an entry should not be allowed to
pass any station "from" any band which they will not be claiming in
their "official" score.
-----Original Message-----
From: David Pruett
To: kr7o@vhfdx.com
Cc: kx9x@arrl.org; vhfcontesting@contesting.com
Sent: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 12:49 pm
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] New VHF+ contest rules
All:
While I acknowledge the point Robert is trying to make, there is a dark
"other" side to this which I think gets ignored.
Allowing a "limited multi" station with more than four bands to operate
the contest on all of their available bands opens the door for "cherry
picking" the best four bands after the contest is over for their limited
multi-op entry. For example, 50/144/432 are usually the best three, but
operating both 222 and 1.2G during the contest and picking the best band
and the "fourth" is unfair, and is in no way within the intent of the
rules. In addition, to be fair such an entry should not be allowed to
pass any station "from" any band which they will not be claiming in
their "official" score.
I sense Robert is trying to prevent the contest's rules from
inadvertently creating any negative impact on activity levels. This is
an admirable goal, but IMHO the integrity of the competition takes
precedence. I don't think it's fair to blame lower levels of microwave
activity on the limited multi category. If people have microwave gear
and don't get on because activity is low, that's their choice. There is
nothing forcing them to run limited multi, other than the fact that they
apparently think it's more fun.
Limited multi is what got me to buy equipment for 50/144/222/432 and try
to pull together a bunch of guys to operate the contest. While I think
microwaves are cool, and I admire the guys who go to the trouble to get
it working, to me it's more work and $$$ than I'm willing to undertake.
There's two sides...
73,
Dave/K8CC
kr7o@vhfdx.com wrote:
> I am going to try and stay out of the rover issue. There were some good
> changes made, and some...... (I will stop here). Time will tell. Out on
> the west coast, but the limited-multi fixed class killed 95% of all
> microwave activity in CA for years.
>
> Related to that:
>
> 2.6.2.Limited Multioperator: Stations submit logs with a maximum of four
> bands used. (Logs from additional bands used, if any, should be included as
> checklogs.)
>
> I am not sure if this exact wording was in the previous version, but the
> SHOULD in this line needs to read MUST BE SUBMITTED! In this era of
> computer log checking where participants are penalized for NIL contacts, it
> is unacceptable for any multi-op to submit a partial log. They MUST submit
> their entire log and the the Cabrillo header needs to specify which bands
> that station wishes judged for the contest.
>
>
>
>
> 73, Robert KR7O/YB2ARO, DM07ba/OI52ee (ex. N7STU)
> kr7o@vhfdx.com
>
> www.vhfdx.com (KR7O/YB2ARO homepages)
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> VHFcontesting mailing list
> VHFcontesting@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
________________________________________________________________________
More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail ! -
http://webmail.aol.com
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|