VHFcontesting
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [VHFcontesting] Difference between types of Rover?

To: Sean Waite <waisean@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] Difference between types of Rover?
From: JamesDuffey <jamesduffey@comcast.net>
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 14:12:14 -0600
List-post: <mailto:vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
OK Sean - I took your shenanigans comment wrong. Sorry. - Duffey KK6MC

James Duffey KK6MC
Cedar Crest NM

> On Apr 12, 2018, at 13:30, Sean Waite <waisean@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I didn't mean shenanigans in a negative way, I'm a fan of shenanigans! The 
> SCCC and other groups that drive a lot of these rules changes are masters of 
> seeing exactly how to work the rules to maximize their scores. It's pretty 
> impressive. 
> 
> Up here in New England it's hard enough to even find another rover, let alone 
> go at it as a pack with one. We have a lot more fixed stations though, iirc.
> 
> Sean WA1TE
> 
>> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 3:14 PM JamesDuffey <jamesduffey@comcast.net> wrote:
>> Sean - One person’s shenanigans are another person’s strategies and tactics. 
>> Pack roving in  VHF + contesting is one way to address very different levels 
>> of activity, mostly microwave,  across the USA. You can like it or not, but 
>> it is not a dishonest activity. 
>> 
>> If the ARRL and others want pack roving eliminated, they should outlaw it 
>> outright. I understand that may be difficult to do without eliminating 
>> roving and its advantages entirely. It is clear that the present rules with 
>> the Unlimited Rover class don’t address the pack roving issue. Few if any 
>> pack rovers participate as Unlimited Rovers. - Duffey KK6MC
>> 
>> 
>> James Duffey KK6MC
>> Cedar Crest NM
>> 
>>> On Apr 12, 2018, at 12:13, Sean Waite <waisean@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Rick K1DS goes pretty well in depth into some of the shenanigans that the 
>>> rover packs would get into in one of his videos on roving:
>>> 
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baETPvsxcdI&t=2687s
>>> 
>>> When you start to get a little into the history, you can see what specific 
>>> events triggered the somewhat odd rules here or there. I appreciate that 
>>> they created the Unlimited class to allow the rules-bending outside-the-box 
>>> stuff to continue, while protecting the groups that don't want to play 
>>> those games.
>>> 
>>> Sean WA1TE
>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 1:45 PM JamesDuffey <jamesduffey@comcast.net> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>> Larissa - You asked:
>>>> “Now, I can see the difference between Limited and Unlimited Rover 
>>>> categories, but why
>>>> is there a separate category for Classic Rover? What are the differences?”
>>>> 
>>>> The big difference between the Classic Rover class and the Unlimited Rover 
>>>> class is that the Classic Rover class is limited to 100 QSOes with other 
>>>> rovers; there is no such limitation in the Unlimited Rover class. The 
>>>> Unlimited Rover cannot contribute the score earned to a club score. In VHF 
>>>> contests, the club competition is big, so this is a significant 
>>>> difference. There are other differences, the Unlimited Rover can have an 
>>>> unlimited number of operators, the Classic Rover is limited to two 
>>>> operators and everything that the classic rover uses to make QSOes must be 
>>>> hauled by one vehicle while in the Unlimited Rover one doesn’t need to 
>>>> haul anything with the rover at all.
>>>> 
>>>> The Unlimited Rover category was instituted to address what many saw as a 
>>>> problem to VHF contesting and roving, that is pack roving. To what an 
>>>> extent pack roving was (is?) a significant problem depends on many 
>>>> factors. I won’t go into that here, but you can get more than a flavor of 
>>>> it by perusing the archives of this list for the first 7 or 8 years of 
>>>> this century. Among other things it is an interesting view into psyche of 
>>>> VHF/UHF contesters. Whatever one’s stance on pack roving, the Unlimited 
>>>> Rover category has had few, if any, entries from pack rovers over the 10 
>>>> years of its existence and in my opinion has failed to gain traction as a 
>>>> class. Not allowing Unlimited Rovers to contribute to a club score has 
>>>> kept the pack rovers in the Classic Rover class, and by judicious choice 
>>>> of QSOes with other rovers, large scores can still be generated by pack 
>>>> rovers in the Classic Rover class even with the 100 QSO limit. Hence there 
>>>> is no real incentive to go to the Unlimited Rover class.  
>>>> 
>>>> I have operated in all three classes and get the most satisfaction out of 
>>>> the Classic Rover class, but by operating Limited Rover I am more 
>>>> competitive nationally and the setup is quick. There is much less 
>>>> competition operating in the Unlimited Rover class, but I have found that 
>>>> winning that class in a division where there is only one other entry does 
>>>> little to sate my competitive appetite.
>>>> 
>>>> I hope this answers your question. If not, ask again. - Duffey KK6MC
>>>> 
>>>> James Duffey KK6MC
>>>> Cedar Crest NM
>>>> 
>>>> > 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>