My preference would be to see the Limited-Multi limit the
number of operators. Not the number of bands. So LM would
only allow for 2 or 3 ops, but as many bands as they can
muster. We don't want to discourage adding bands, band
limiting by bands tend to do that.
Re the "cherry picking". I don't see why that would be so bad
assuming that the unclaimed band(s) Q's are *required* to be
submitted as part of the log.
Another idea is to expand on the notion of enticing beginners
is to allow a beginner to participate in any category
(including Rover/SO categories) as a freebee. The only
restriction being that this "beginner" op would only be
allowed participate (and be log listed) as a beginner 2 times
out every 5 years, and then only once per station
participation. So for example they could be a beginer op for
one contest at SO station KZ#ZZZ, and then operte again as a
"beginner" at another station WA#AAA. After that they would
no longer be consider a beginner from a contest logging
perspective.
Duane
N9DG
--- Ray J <ray@w9ray.org> wrote:
> I think that the limited-multi class should be akin to a
> "beginners"
> multi op..
>
> You could get some "big gun" multi op station that scores
> huge numbers
> on their bottom bands.. but know they are not going to win
> in the
> regular multi class so they "move down" to the limited
> class and kick
> butt... I do not feel thats right.... you should have to
> score all the
> qso's that you work. And if someone should decide not to
> use them
> bands that they could operate, then.... shame on them...
>
> W9Ray
____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|