On 11/16/2020 3:22 PM, jimk8mr@aol.com wrote:
I see two bad, or at least less than desirable features:
1. The same country/same zone limit is way too loose. The guy at the
station in Maine messages the station in Miami "I can't raise this BY
mult here on 15. Can you QSY to work him?" Something along the lines
of 150 mile radius would be better.
>> Except that they would be competing against other stations that
could do exactly the same thing, and is part of what I meant when I said
that it opens up some interesting strategy considerations. I'll repeat
... this is a new and separate category, it's not a change to the
traditional M/M category like you stated.<<
2. Contests are better served by having lots of different stations to
work. If multiple stations show up in the contest as one station,
that's fewer people for everybody else to work.
>>The number of M/M entries compared to the number of single op entries
is marginal at best. I don't see this new category as changing that
situation ... and if it does it simply means that it is a popular idea.
Why would that be bad?<<
I don't see "lesser stations" having much fun collaborating when the
competition or benchmark is the group that sucks up all the good
rent-a-stations for the weekend.
>>You mean like already happens for various single op categories???
How is this any different?<<
73 - Jim K8MR
I'm not trying to be a cheerleader for this new category, but I don't
see what all the fuss is about it. I think there are more valid
complaints about the changes to unassisted operation.
73,
Dave AB7E
-----Original Message-----
From: David Gilbert <ab7echo@gmail.com>
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Sent: Mon, Nov 16, 2020 3:14 pm
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Rule Changes for the CQ WW WPX SSB and CW
Contests in 2021
It's a new M/M category, not a replacement for the existing M/M
category. It's an "addition", not a "change". What causes that to be
such a bad idea? Maybe it is, but I'm having a difficult time seeing
it. If anything it makes an interesting possibility for lesser stations
to collaborate, and I could imagine that it opens up some interesting
strategy considerations.
Dave AB7E
"The 2021 CQ WW WPX RTTY, SSB and CW contests will include a new
Multi-Transmitter Distributed category. Stations operating in this
category
may have a maximum of six transmitted signals, one per band at any one
time,
from stations in different locations. All equipment, including
remotely-controlled equipment, must be located in same DXCC entity and CQ
Zone. Six bands may be activated simultaneously. This is a new,
stand-alone category. It is not intended to replace, or compete with,
other
multi-operator categories."
On 11/16/2020 11:42 AM, K8MR via CQ-Contest wrote:
> The more troubling change to me is the essentially no-limits
distributed multiops. Competitive Multi-op, especially multi-multi,
over the years has been a category for conspicuous consumption station
builders, combined with the chance for folks to spend a weekend
hanging out with other serious contesters. With COVID I understand a
place for distributing some stations over a relatively small
geographical area. And likewise having remote operators operating a
station with the equipment and antennas in one place. But having a
multi with transmitters and receivers in Maine and in Miami, and
anywhere in between, switching back and forth between bands to take
advantage of propagation advantages from a particular location, is
crazy. While this change is presently just for WPX, if it is also a
test run for CQWW, it's a very bad idea.
> While over the years I've done a lot of multi-ops from K8AZ, mostly
in the ARRL and CQWW DX tests, operating as part of a "multi" while
sitting at my own station leaves me cold. And the contests benefit
from having more calls available to work, rather than putting in
single call "multi" efforts tying up lot of stations and people.
>
> 73 - Jim K8MR
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com <mailto:CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
<http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|