So as a member of one of the well known multi-op groups watching this
"NASCAR restrictor plate racing" rover rules discussion, I am curious.
If we miss working a rover on Sat. while they are in a certain grid and
that rover comes back through that grid on Sun. on their way home, does
this prevent the possibility of us working them on Sun. in the original
grid ??
Ron
WW8RR
-----Original Message-----
From: vhfcontesting-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:vhfcontesting-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Steve
Clifford
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 4:08 PM
To: w2ev@yahoo.com
Cc: vhfcontesting@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] Endorse Rover Rules Revisions EXCEPT the 30
QLimit
What is it you're trying to fix with this proposed rule? I honestly
don't get it. It makes no sense.
Steve
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 3:56 PM, Ev Tupis <w2ev@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Not at all, John. You find the best location in a Grid-4 and operate.
> When you're done...you're done. Move on to the best location in the
> next
> Grid-4 and operate there. (uh-oh...one more rule needed: 3. Once
> operation begins from a given Grid-4, the station may not move to
> another location within a Grid-4 for the duration of the operation).
>
> Nobody said that you can't drive through a previously activated grid
> to get somewhere. You simply can't reactivate while you do it.
>
> Simple and elegant.
>
> Ev, W2EV
>
>
>
> --- On Tue, 2/17/09, John D'Ausilio <jdausilio@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > From: John D'Ausilio <jdausilio@gmail.com>
> > Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] Endorse Rover Rules Revisions EXCEPT
> > the 30
> Q Limit
> > To: w2ev@yahoo.com
> > Cc: vhfcontesting@contesting.com
> > Date: Tuesday, February 17, 2009, 3:48 PM
> > Look Ev, the 'once and once only' grid rule you seem
> > to be in love
> > with is not going to be acceptable to most rovers .. if roads all
> > ran N-S or E-W it wouldn't be such a problem, but as people have
> > stated in most places (including all of my routes in the past) you
> > revisit grids either because of where the road goes or because you
> > eventually have to get home ;) Your proposal would drastically
> > reduce the amount of time I could operate (and increase the amount
> > of time I'd be driving) ..
> >
> > de w1rt/john
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 3:43 PM, Ev Tupis <w2ev@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > --- On Tue, 2/17/09, Glen Overby
> > <goverby@charter.net> wrote:
> > >> Ev Tupis wrote:
> > >> > 1. Rovers calculate their final score by
> > simple summing of their
> > >> > scores from each individual Grid-4 that they
> > activate.
> > >
> > >> Didn't the scoring system used to be like
> > that?
> > >
> > > No. There was always an "incentive" quotient
> > at play.
> > >
> > >> > 2. Once operation begins from a new Grid-4,
> > it may not
> > >> > resume in a previously activated Grid-4 for
> > the remainder
> > >> > of the event.
> > >>
> > >> I'm fine with the 30 / 50% QSO limit, and
> > think this is
> > >> a bad idea.
> > >
> > > The 30/50 thing is too difficult for most people to
> > abide by. Why are you resistant to the above proposal?
> > It's simple to implement and abide by.
> > >
> > > Ev
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
>
_______________________________________________
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
|