I really never know what to say about all this. I've only been a Rover a few
times, once in the CQ-VHF contest, once for fun in ARRL June VHF and in the
10 GHz contest. I think I was a Rover a few years ago when 6 meters was
phenomenal in both the June and July contests and I figured I wasn't going
to make many higher-band QSO's anyway, so I just took 6 and 2 meters in the
June contest.
But it's basically your conscience versus theirs. I know that's no
consolation when you lose to someone whose conscience is telling them
something different than yours does, but you know what your station can do
and what you've done to make your QSO's in a contest. I really wouldn't know
how to go about explaining my views to someone who has their own
explanations for grid circling so firmly planted in their minds. Maybe it's
not possible.
I've been on the VHF Distance Scoring discussion group (and not contributing
as much to the discussion as I'd hoped to). But one point is that a
distance-based scoring in a contest could negate the value of grid
circling. The points value of 50 QSO's over a distance of one mile could be
completely overwhelmed by one QSO at 500 miles.
Someone would still probably complain, though, about unfair advantages due
to outstanding tropo openings like I had in last year's August UHF contest.
But in this case it was just luck - I happened to be in the right place at
the right time. I've missed out on others and said to myself "Oh well ...
one of these days." Then one of those days happened. :-)
73, Zack W9SZ
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 12:37 PM, frank bechdoldt <k3uhf@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> To the ARRL PSC and Ethics Committees.
>
> My name is Frank Bechdoldt, my call is K3UHF, I have been a ham
> for 25 years when I got my ticket at the age of 13. I was active in Mars
> while aboard the USS Nimitz, and a few various ARRL clubs over the years.
> However as life goes, I lost interest in other than 2 meter FM sometime
> around 1992 but re-discovered interest in ham radio in 2002.
>
> When I decided to get back in and I realized I could get an
> Yaesu FT 847 that did a lot things like vhf sideband for the same price as
> an HF radio 10 years before. So I purchased an 847 and got on the air on vhf
> SSB with a hidden antenna and a tuner. I accidentally ran into a vhf
> contest and worked over 100 people on 6, 2 and 432 with a 100 foot hidden
> long wire. (I had CC&R’s). I was hooked.
>
> I then decided to make a vhf rover station to go out in the Jan
> 2003 contest. I faithfully roved every vhf plus and even changed my call
> sign to reflect my enthusiasm for the high bands. After building my
> station up to 6 bands in 2004 I then by chance I ran into a group of what we
> call “grid circlers” working together as a team of three cars with fm
> handhelds on all the bands up to 1.2 GHz and Ramsey laser kits.
>
> The group was a bit standoffish as I watched as they shuffled
> their cars around the grid square intersection working only each other for
> points. It was a sight to see as they all worked each other from about 500
> feet apart. I didn’t think much of it and I moved on.
>
> A few months later I realized that this group what was only
> equipped with handhelds beat my station by a 10 to one margin. You can see
> my rig under my call on qrz.com. I then re-doubled my efforts added a 7th
> band and posted a score twice as big the next year. However when I opened
> up my QST I seen that a group of grid circlers in California did the same
> thing as the group I witnessed near Seattle, but refined it to a level and
> score that it made it impossible for a station who is trying to work
> everyone to compete. IE my 70000 pt score working 600 QSO’s with 250 unique
> stations could not compete with a group of three people working only
> themselves at grid corners to generate 800-900 QSO’s with only two other
> unique stations.
>
> For your understanding here is the online dictionary definition
> of Grid Circling in your contests.
>
> Grid circling
> Grid circling is a highly-coordinated operation of two or more rover
> stations. Two or more rover stations arrive at an area near the intersection
> of four Maidenhead grid locators, and "circle" through the possible
> combinations of grid locators, making contacts in each combination. The
> rover stations then drive to the next intersection of grid locators on their
> planned route and repeat the process. Stations participating in grid
> circling do not need to be capable of communicating over distances longer
> than a few miles. Even without making contact with any other stations in the
> contest, grid circling stations can generate large scores just by contacting
> the other stations in their small, tightly-coordinated group.
>
> Some object to the activity because it does not contribute to the contest
> at large; the stations in the grid circling effort generally do not contact
> many other stations in the contest. Others object to the unfairness of these
> stations competing in the same category as other rover stations that do not
> grid circle, and who are at a perceived scoring disadvantage. Grid circlers
> themselves often argue that the technical and operational challenges of such
> an operation represent significant achievement, and the activity, if
> discouraged, is not explicitly prohibited. Some suggest that grid circling
> should be allowed, but such teams of station should be ranked in a separate
> category from other rovers.
>
> Several rule modificatins have been tried to address this issue.
> Rule changes have came out without much open discussion in the community as
> a whole and resulted in even greater contoversy. I would suggest that there
> be open hearings when you propose a rule change so people can point out
> potential issues before said rules are in place.
>
> The issue I bring to bith the PSC and Ethic committees is the
> ethical implications of the current VHF rules. The VHF rulese clearly
> encourages everyone to work as many people as possible but there are no
> teeth to these rules. Several winners of all three rover catagories are now
> from a single group of stations working as a team with a very low percentage
> of QSOs with parties outside of their team as compared to their competitors.
>
> The failure here is the reluctance of the ARRL to put a solid
> firewall between the two different contesting activities. That is pratice of
> working your team mates for points as compared to trying to work as many
> stations as possible for points.
>
> The failed attemt to curb this was the unlimited rover with the
> intent for team activites to remain there. However the group in California
> put a teram together of 6-8 stations all owned by one man who worked each
> other in 1000 foot long QSOs in all three catagories to win all three
> catagories nationally. I ask the ethics committee is this ethically correct
> and the will of the ARRL?
>
> If so, the rule encouraging people to work as many stations as
> possible should be stricken and replaced with generate as many QSOs as
> possible.
>
> The VUAC recomemned a lower maximum number of Rover to rover
> QSOs and a max perecntage of rover to Rover QSO’s in a log for non unlimited
> rovers. This was passed over by the PSC without giving a reason for doing
> so. Now a single man can send out 10 stations who can work each other
> station up to 100 times on gear all owned by one man to put up a monster
> score with 900 gaurenteed QSO’s and the grids/ multipliers to go with them.
> Is this what you guys think is ethically correct.
>
>
>
> Another flaw in the rules is the use of check logs. This guy
> who may have 10- 10 band stations could send out 4 limiteds, 5 traditional
> rovers and one unlimited. The 4 limiteds could work the unlimited and
> traional guys on the higher bands and enter them as check logs while the
> unlimited and traditional applies tehm to the their score. Furthermore the
> tradional rovers could check log the lower point valued contacts with the
> limited rovers while applying the higher valued contacts to their logs until
> they reach the 100 per other rover match. Also 9 out of 10 stations would
> still inflate their clubs score here.
>
> A station should not be allowed to make contacts on bands that
> are not part of their total contest log. IE no hy-brid situations where
> half of your QSO’s are not part of the official log. His leads to other
> forms of ethically questionable behavior. For instance, in my last contest
> I only made 8- 1.2 ghz contacts, and 1- 902 mhz contact if I would of
> check logged those contacts and dropped to the limited class I would of
> doubled the national winner’s score. However if you leave your driveway
> with 6 bands you should be a 6 band station period. I ask you to fix that
> ASAP.
>
> Check logs should also be 100 percent check logs, no cherry
> picking contacts. A rover should have to apply the first 100 contacts in his
> log with another individual rover as the contacts and not cherrie pick them.
> A station entering a contest log should not be allowed to enter a check log
> and the rover club distance radius should be dropped to avoid confusion.
>
> I believe the current practices by Wayne Overbeck are an ethical
> violation of what your contest is encouraging. I would like it formally
> investigated.
>
> I would also like to see the ARRL to publish all logs entered.
> As a dues paying member I have the right to see the info generated to create
> the awards I pay for as a member.
>
> Finally the latest rule change as of yesterday is couter
> productive to grow roving. I am dropping down to 4 bands because the
> practice of grid circling is somewhat contained there. Someone who wants to
> graduate from limited to traditional would have to gather together 9 other
> 10 band stations as well as build his own and cordinate short distance QSOs
> across easily acessable flat terrain to compete with the current winners.
> That’s quite a jump from owning a icom 706 and a 222 transverter.
>
>
>
> Sincerely
>
> Frank Bechdoldt
>
> K3uhf
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Windows Live™: Keep your life in sync.
> http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_BR_life_in_synch_052009
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|