On Wed, 27 May 2009 15:30:04 -0700, "frank bechdoldt"
<k3uhf@hotmail.com> said:
> The poll taken by the guy in Texas 2 or 3 years ago, maybe 4 or 5 now
> showed that amongst rovers that over 60 percent disagreed with grid
> circling.
Did that poll include people who'd happily become rovers who aren't now
if they got a cool team shirt, and got to drive in formation across two
or three states like the professional driving team in the movies? LOL!
Seriously though... the poll is worthless because it polls only CURRENT
rovers. At 100 entries a contest for the most well attended contest in
the world by rovers, I wouldn't call a poll of 100 people in all of ham
radio, statistically significant.
Tell some people to put together rover teams, and the highest rover
score nationwide wins everyone on their ten person team a new IC-910...
and I bet you'd have a whole different contest.
Seriously Frank, you can't base what Roving should or shouldn't become
off of an OBVIOUSLY failing ability to get new rovers... if "team
roving" took off, and those teams were willing to work whatever they
heard, nationwide... it'd be a hoot. Sorry, us individual rovers might
not like it... but the numbers don't lie... if the stated goal of the
contest is "as many contacts with grid squares as possible"
[paraphrased] then technically, the grid-circlers are doing a better job
at meeting the contest goal than you or I are.
If the ARRL wants to CHANGE the GOAL of the contest... that's a whole
different ball of wax.
You'll probably keep complaining right into the "era of team roving"
that's seriously getting traction, though... I applaud you for your
consistency, but you and the other 60% you cite in this unofficial
"poll" might just be the minority in a few short years.
Team roving CAN take off... now whether or not it SHOULD, is another
story altogether. But there's NO doubt in my mind that more people will
attempt it, now that the Californians have proven that it works.
And I also think there's nothing unnatural about it. Did the first
people to climb up the hills at K8GP or W2SZ/1 not realize that their
team efforts on their multi-op stations would reap great rewards for
them, as far as their scores went?
Rovers can either band together or keep complaining, but I guarantee
unless team roving is completely banned, the teams will continue to win.
It's a sheer numbers game when every grid square is a multiplier.
Even the "distance scoring" is a loser for an individual vs. a team...
all a team has to do is send someone to the top of a high mountain, and
everyone else scatters to the four winds... and that TEAM effort will
beat any individual score in THAT environment too.
To roll back the clock and make roving a completely
personal/individualistic thing again, would require that there be no
commercially available rigs for any of the bands in the contest, and
people putting together their own from scrap radio parts again. That
was true 20 years ago, but no more.
Let's be brutally honest here... because I'm not at all embarrassed to
admit that if DEMI were not in business, I wouldn't have two Division
Leader pieces of wallpaper as a rover. I have no interest in
building/homebrewing VHF+ transverters.
Team roving packs are here to stay, unless they're specifically banned
by the contest.
Once we all get over the emotional part, and realize it's all over but
the crying... the "other rovers" could put together some impressive team
efforts that would beat the Californians at their own game.
What's REALLY interesting about this latest rule change is that the
MANUFACTURERS aren't quietly up ARRL's hiney.
The only two MODERN rigs on the market today that are available
off-the-shelf for VHF+ roving are the TS-2000X and the IC-910... and
both of those have 1.2 GHz modules, not 222.
Imagine if you will, that ARRL changed a major HF contest to only allow
TenTec rigs to participate -- don't you think there'd be some
"interesting" behind the scenes phone calls made to Newington? Or maybe
a new rule that DXPeditions can't be commercially funded? Hmm... are
those Amateurs being "compensated"? I know Private Pilots can't accept
anything more than "split costs" compensation without a Commercial
license... Amateur rules state NO COMPENSATION... isn't giving someone a
ride to a tropical island on Icom's dime, "compensation"?
Anyway... that's neither here nor there, but imagine the politics in the
back rooms. All sorts of examples in HF of BIG MONEY supporting
contesting and other "interest groups" like DXPeditions. But, nothing
via back channels to ARRL from the manufacturers on VHF contesting
rules?
Hey Kenwood... Icom... US Sales staff... give ARRL a private
off-the-record phone call and tell 'em you're not impressed with them
taking away your entire new operator market share for those rigs! Don't
you want to sell them with the 1.2 GHz option?
We'll never hear about it if it does happen, since that would be
perceived as "tampering" by the manufacturers, but it's sure be
entertaining if it'd happen behind the scenes... just thinkin' outside
"the box"...
Nate WY0X
--
Nate Duehr
nate@natetech.com
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|