eHam Logo

Community
 Home
 eHam.net Home
 Articles & Stories
 Contesting Wiki
 Speakout
 Strays
 Survey
 My Profile

Resources
 This Week's Contests
 Classified Ads
 Contest Links
 Product Reviews



Contest Lists
 3830
 CQ-Contest
 CT-User
 NA-User
 SD-User
 TRLog
 VHFcontesting
 WriteLog

Other Lists
 Amps
 AntennaWare
 Propagation
 RFI
 RTTY
 TenTec
 TopBand
 TowerTalk
 Yaesu

 Mailing List FAQs


Site Information
 About This Site
 Contesting.com Team

Contesting Online Survey

Survey Question Current Survey Question

Recently the RDXC committee reclassified P3F to high power from low power without publicly providing strong evidence that any infraction had occurred. They concluded was that the contestant was running HP on 80/40m but not full-time, just 10 minutes here and there without any convincing evidence. It appears they used the RBN as their source of information. Should the RXDC contest have to publicly provide convincing evidence before reclassifying a station from LP to HP?

Recent Surveys

Randy, K5ZD, wrote a sidebar titled " Convergence and Change" in the 2015 CQWW CW printed results in CQ magazine. He wrote that the "convergence of personal computers, Internet access, DX clusters, and CW Skimmer have changed the nature of CW contesting". He goes to say that it is "more difficult to police the line between the single operator working alone and those who are using the assistance of DX spotting." In light of this convergence and change is it time to recombine SO and SOA into a single category?
2016-05-28


What's your primary Software for HF Contests ? ( no VHF/UHF ! )
2015-07-17


Are you ready the this year's winter contest season
2015-07-05


What ways have you found to be effective to attract newcomers to our hobby?
2015-04-28


What is your linear?
2015-02-09


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!