Contesting Online Survey

Survey Question Current Survey Question

What type of radio do you use for contesting?
Recent Surveys

The ARRL recently announced its Diamond DXCC Challenge (http://www.arrl.org/news/arrl-diamond-dxcc-challenge) to celebrate the 75th anniversary of the ARRL’s DXCC Award. The first rule says the Diamond DXCC Challenge Awards are available to all amateurs worldwide who contact a minimum of 100 countries from the Diamond DXCC List. US amateurs must be members of the ARRL. Do you think
2011-12-31

How were the CQWW CW condx compared to the CQWW SSB condx at your QTH?
2011-11-28

How were conditions for the CQ WW SSB at your location
2011-10-31

Are you ready for the autumn/winter contest season?
2011-09-05

How were condx in this year's CQ WPX CW contest at your QTH?
2011-06-27

View All Survey Questions
Have a good idea for a Contesting Online Survey question?
Enter your idea!

A new category - Xtreme - has been added to the CQWW contest (see http://cqww.com/CQ_WW_Xtreme_Rules.pdf for details). The Xtreme category encourages the development of new technologies in amateur radio communications in general and contesting in particular. Entries in this category will be evaluated on two equally-weighted dimensions, score and innovation. Will you consider entering the Xtreme category?
Posted: Aug 17, 2009 (209 votes, 10 comments) by VE5ZX

Yes
No
Maybe
Don't know
Don't care
(209 votes, 10 comments)

Survey Results

Yes 14% (29)

No 68% (143)

Maybe 11% (23)

Don't know 5% (10)

Don't care 2% (4)

Survey Comments

I agree with N1UR. Remote receivers don't make any sense in a radio contest. If a US station can have a receiver in Europe connected back to him via the Internet we might as well allow Internet contacts since that is basically what it amounts to. It will be interesting to see how the awards folks (DXCC, etc.) handle these kinds of contacts. Otherwise I have no problem with the Xtreme concept though it isn't for me.
Posted by n5aw on August 10, 2009

Personally I don't care how many categories a contest has, as long there is one were we can be competitive.

I agree with Steve, the new technology won't go away an can't be banned. OK, it probably can be banned but it's nearly impossible to check the use of this technology so why bother banning it.

So it's probably best to let contesters experiment whit this technology in there own category.

What wrong with one more category (or two or 3 for that matter)? As long as a category has enough entrants so they can compete whit one another, I don't see the problem.
Posted by PD2R on August 3, 2009

Cycle 24

None of this will matter when the next sunspot cycle comes around. There are too many categories already. Low power, Qrp, Multi-Multi, Multi-single...blah blah blah.
Here's a great idea, how about making field Day a "real" contest?
Posted by wr6a on July 31, 2009

Extreme

How bout Extremely small antennas!
Posted by NE2I on July 20, 2009

All these new ideas for categories, but never low power multi-op?

Posted by KB8YJU on July 11, 2009

Gadgetry will not replace a first class operator!
Posted by w0uo on July 9, 2009

Extreme

How about a category for "wire/vertical antennas"?
Posted by N3XL on July 2, 2009

Skimmer is here to stay. New and future technologies are here to stay. Like it or not that is the fact. A separate category for these users is the best plan. Operate that way and enter in that category if you like; if not then don't.

The real problem and issue is those who use these new technologies but enter in the regular Single Operator category. THEY ARE CHEATERS!!!

73 Steve
Posted by oldfart13 on June 21, 2009

Extreme

Sounds like a category for the rich and famous. Let's also get rid of skimmer.
Posted by n1jm on June 20, 2009

Remove the Remote Receiving

I am not comfortable with the receivers around the world concept of this category. The rest of it is consistant with good radio for "extremists" that are less concerned with the pure art and more interested in chasing all the possibility of technology. Competing amongst themselves....I am all for it. But if it causes people to question the "earned value" of MY QSO. I am having a problem with that.

Ed N1UR
Posted by N1UR on June 16, 2009

To post a comment, you must be logged in.
If you are not a member, become one now!