VHFcontesting
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [VHFcontesting] wb8wsf's question

To: "frank bechdoldt" <k3uhf@hotmail.com>, <vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] wb8wsf's question
From: "Shupienis, Joseph" <jshupienis@ccac.edu>
Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2008 22:20:24 -0400
List-post: <vhfcontesting@contesting.com">mailto:vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
As a relative newcomer, I've been just sitting back and reading this thread.

It's time to voice my opinion, so here goes.

 * 1 hour from first QSO in a grid to the first QSO in the next grid. Yes. 
(Precedent: ARRL General Contest rule 3.15)
 * 6-digit grid square. Maybe. Kind of hard to do without a new GPS for roving 
while in motion.
 * Limits to rover-to-rover contacts. Undecided. Doesn't affect small-fry like 
me. Seems like it was easily circumvented by the grid-circlers.

(SARCASM MODE ON) 

Why not just outlaw grid-circling, period? Disqualification would be a start. 
What does it add to VHF+ contesting? Does it add activity? (None that matters 
to ME!)

Once we've cleared that up, we can move on to captive rovers, and the stations 
who "own" them. (They don't give ME any points so no loss to ME!) Disqualify 
'em all!

Next, let's get rid of those rovers who make mistakes, log dupes, whine on this 
reflector... Disqualified, disqualified, DISQUALIFIED! ... Oh wait! I'M one of 
them!  Oh Nooooooooo!

(/SARCASM)

The bottom line is, we have to draw the line somewhere. But it should be clear, 
accomplish a specific purpose and fit in with the spirit of the contest. And 
let's keep it simple. Obviously the Rover rule changes didn't stop the 
grid-circlers from spoiling other peoples fun.

Maybe we should say what we mean, and mean what we say. For example: "The new 
ROVER-TEAM category is for grid-circling groups and captive rovers only. The 
aggregate score for the entire team will be accepted as a single entry. 
Individual scores from team members will not be accepted in this or any 
category."

I think that would give them all a place to play, and could foster some 
competition among those so inclined. It would let the rest of us do ROVER, 
ROVER-LIMITED and ROVER-UNLIMITED on a truly competitive basis.

Speaking of... Maybe we really don't need three (or four) types of rover 
categories. Many other contests get by with few categories, and we could say: 
ROVER and ROVER-UNLIMITED. If you use any of: high power (as currently 
defined), more than 4 bands, more than 2 operators, you become UNLIMITED.

Most importantly, a consensus among us all is difficult to achieve but 
necessary before fiddling with the rules any more. They are too convoluted as 
it is.

-----Original Message-----
From: frank bechdoldt [mailto:k3uhf@hotmail.com]
Sent: Sun 7/27/2008 8:46 PM
To: vhfcontesting@contesting.commit to 
Subject: [VHFcontesting] wb8wsf's question
 

Steve asked what would I do.
 
Ive been vocal on this about 5 or 6 years.
Had some good ideas and some lame ones.
You could find some of them in the past postings back to 2003 or so.
 
I think I'm better educated on thisngs than before. At first I wanted team 
roving banned. But they do spur some activity.  
 
I am quite firm in the idea that team roving should be in its own catagory.
It was the intent of the Arrl to encourage people who team rove to submit their 
logs in this catagory. However intent and encorage does not work with strong 
willed individuals.
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting

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