This little gun does not agree.
If the top score op in w/ve or whatever is also the top score op in the
world, then he won both trophies.
Magnaminity has nothing to do with it, unless we start to follow the Alice
in Wonderland philosophy where "all have won, and all shall receive prizes".
I will never win North America, but if I should ever come close, I do not
want a trophy to default to me because the top North America scorer was also
the top World scorer. His being both the top N.A. and the top world is not
unfair competition, it is a helluva tough accomplishmenet.
73,
Rusty, NA5TR
----- Original Message -----
From: "Albert Crespo" <f5vhj@orange.fr>
To: "Randy Thompson K5ZD" <k5zd@charter.net>
Cc: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 4:50 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Putting the spoon into the pot: WPX - who
isonfirst?
> CQ's policy to spread the plaque winners around so that one station does
> not
> win multiple plaques is a good one. The purpose of specific class plaques
> like a North American plaque is rendered meaningless if the world leader
> also happens to be in North America and wins both the plaques. If you win
> one plaque in a contest , that should be enough . You should be
> magnanimous
> enough to let someone else share in the distribution of plaques. It does
> not
> cheapen the achievement of the other operator who receives a plaque who
> happens to have a lesser score then then the world leader nor does it take
> away anything from the higher class operator.
> This is amateur radio where sportsmanship also incorporates some restraint
> on claiming the spoils of a competition.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Randy Thompson K5ZD" <k5zd@charter.net>
> To: <kr2q@optimum.net>; <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2009 6:05 PM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Putting the spoon into the pot: WPX - who is
> onfirst?
>
>
>>
>> This is not an issue specific to the WPX Contest. I believe all CQ
>> Contests
>> (WW, RTTY, WPX, 160) follow this convention of only awarding one plaque
>> per
>> entry.
>>
>> The goal of the plaque program is to motivate and provide recognition.
>>
>> There are 3 "levels" of plaques (World, Continent, Country). If an entry
>> was allowed to win multiple plaques, then one great effort from an
>> advantaged location could take all 3 levels and leave other strong
>> efforts
>> unrecognized. Perhaps all the plaques should not say "Winner", but
>> again,
>> that's they way it has been done historically. The policy has been to
>> always award an entry with the highest level plaque they were eligible
>> for.
>>
>> I am interested in hearing from the contest community if this policy
>> should
>> be changed (specifically for the WPX Contest).
>>
>> What we have done for WPX in 2009 is change the definition of the North
>> America plaques so that they only apply to stations outside the USA and
>> Canada. This accomplishes two desirable results: 1) it encourages
>> activity
>> from North American stations outside USA/Canada, and 2) the winner of the
>> USA or Canada for a category will always be the winner of the country
>> plaque.
>>
>> The list of plaques currently sponsored for the upcoming WPX contests can
>> be
>> seen at http://www.cqwpx.com/plaques.htm. (We are still looking for a
>> few
>> more sponsors.)
>>
>> To follow the example of my friend Jim White (K4OJ - SK), it is only 27
>> more
>> days until the CQ WPX Phone Contest!
>>
>>
>> Randy Thompson, K5ZD
>>
>> Director - CQ WPX Contest
>>
>> email: k5zd@cqwpx.com
>> web: www.cqwpx.com
>>
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
>>> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
>>> kr2q@optimum.net
>>> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 11:37 PM
>>> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
>>> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Putting the spoon into the pot: WPX -
>>> who is on first?
>>>
>>> Just got my March 2009 CQ mag with the cw WPX results.
>>>
>>> YIPPIE!! I won a trophy!!
>>>
>>> BUT WAIT A MINUTE.....what's this I see?
>>>
>>> TI5N wins for the world (congrats) and get the WORLD trophy.
>>>
>>> I win for USA, but since TI5N got the WORLD trophy and now
>>> I'm 2nd place in N.A., I get the NA trophy. But I didn't win
>>> NA, I won USA. So why would I get the NA trophy?
>>>
>>> And ELSE do I see? Because I got the N.A. trophy, N7IR, who
>>> is 2nd place USA, (an amazing feat from AZ) wins the USA trophy.
>>>
>>> HUH??????
>>>
>>> This made no sense to me 30 years ago in CQWW when W1WY
>>> thought that it would be equitable to not only do this sort
>>> of thing, but make the previous year's winner ineligible to
>>> win the trophy again. So what happened? Station "A" won in
>>> year 19xx. In year 19xx+1, they won again, but could bit win
>>> the trophy, so station "B" got the trophy....and the trophy
>>> was engraved with the word WINNER. But it gets better. In
>>> year 19xx+2, Station A again won, Station B again came in
>>> 2nd, but since they were both "ineligible," Station C got the
>>> trophy, which again was engrave with WINNER. This nonsense
>>> was stopped long ago. The winner is the winner, period.
>>>
>>> So what would I do in this case? TI5N wins the world AND
>>> wins N.A. He should get TWO trophies. This concept of
>>> "being fair" works well in kindergarten and first grade...not
>>> contesting.
>>>
>>> OK...taking a step back and now handing the spoon off.
>>>
>>> de Doug KR2Q
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|