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!


Thanks for voting! Your vote has been included in the results below.

[Please read "The 24-Hour DX Contest Challenge" by Pete, N4ZR, and Mike, N2MG, seen above before you answer this question] If a 24-hour category were introduced in CQWW or ARRL DX contests, would you:
  Posted: Apr 02, 2013   (512 votes, 17 comments) by VE5ZX

Survey Results
operate more time 42% (215)
operate less time 12% (62)
it wouldn't affect me 46% (235)

Survey Comments
All for it -- Certificate Should be Half Size
A while ago I suggested a 1/2 contest category which was essentially this 24 hour suggestion. The only concern of mine then was that the time-limited category might not allow you to operate for the first few hours of the contest. That way you hve to commit to the new category and it won't be dominated by big guns who decide at 5AM to drop down to the 25 hour category. I humorously suggest that the certificate should look half size, with odd years filling the left part of a frame and even years the right part. Win two consecutive years in a row and you can put the pieces together to fill out a picture frame hansomly!

Posted by N2BA on May 10, 2003

24 hour CWC
Regarding the 24 hour contest within a contest:
An excellent proposal that should be tried in CQWW for a three year period and then evaluated by the contest committee...

The 24 hour CWC (hereafter called CWC24) and the 48 hour main contest shall be exclusive for scoring purposes - i.e. you have to pick one or the other when submitting a log for scoring and awards...
Each CWC24 contestor gets to pick an individual 24 hour contiguous window, with no rest periods in keeping with the philosophy of CQWW... There shall be a 6 hour minimum operating time for submitting a log for scoring in the CWC24... The 60 minutes preceeding the start of the contestors 24 hour CWC24 window shall be free of operating in the contest... The 60 minutes following the contestors declared 24 hour CWC24 window shall be free of operating in the contest... Cross checking of other logs shall be used to verify the non operating periods... The submitter of a CWC24 log may operate for fun and as a check log outside of his 24 hour CWC24 window and it's associated non operating time blocks...-

Given the varying time zones and varying propagation around the world, allowing each contestor to choose his best shot at a good score is going to stimulate more competition than any other arrangement...

More contest entries is good... Worrying about the CWC stealing operators from the CQWW itself is a waste of energy... Many operators, including myself, who no longer can justify a 48 hour push will only dabble for an hour or two... Giving me a CWC24 to shoot at (CWC24 is my proposed formal name for the contest within a contest)will stimulate me to make at least a 6 hour push for submitting a log...

For the contest committee members reading this, I will sponsor awards for the CWC24 if adopted by the committee... You may contact me via my email...

Denny - K8DO

Posted by K8DO on March 20, 2003

24 Hours
I Can't say that I AM for it. I'm not sure it will promote MORE activity. It WILL give another category for awards.. if that's the objective.I have read the comments>>may keep not so serious on longer for a relatively serious effort etc,<< Casual operators.. the one's that make a contest a contest.. will operate when they have time as always... will probably not turn in a log and just "Hand out a few QSO's". What purpose, other than adding a category for awards, will this serve? I'm not knocking the idea.. I'm all for more activity.. I think you'll see some OP's who previously tried to stay on for as long as they can.. change categories to the 24 hr. category thereby reducing the number of overall contacts. I believe there will be more of these than casual Ops who choose to enter the contest. I do see the benefits to our oversee's friends.. that may be reason enough to change the entire contest.. Just one opinion.

Posted by ae9b on March 19, 2003

24h CWC scoring
The scoring rules would need to be the same or very very similar, as my operating objectives and strategy alter noticeably between the big contests - at least where it is a 'multipler' contest as opposed to 'rate' contesting.

The proposal would not affect my operating time. Good luck.
David VK2CZ / VK8AA

Posted by vk2cz on March 12, 2003

No to 24
From the non-competive small station/limited operating time perspective 24 hrs is a bad idea. The longer the contest the better my chance to spread out operating time and work around other commitments while maximizing my operating time. Further in a DX contest competion will be increased and easy mults will be harder to work for smaller stations. Sometimes it takes me until Sunday AM to get a P4 on 40m..in a 24hr test I would never get them.

Posted by N1SNB on March 12, 2003

24 hours
I think this idea is great. It would probably not decrease the participation, it would rather raise it. All those people who don't operate serioulsy in the contest just because they don't have the time. This would make them able to go for a serious effort but only to operate 24 hours.

Great idea!

Posted by SM3WMV on March 12, 2003

NF1J's concern
NF1J's concern might be justified if the proposal was for 24 contiguous hours, but we're suggesting up to 6 on periods, off periods not less than 30 minutes, total not to exceed 24 hours. That means his hypothetical small station could get on for both high-band openings and still have lots of time left to use on the low bands looking for mults.

Posted by N4ZR on March 10, 2003

24 Hour Contest Time
This is a very good idea and I think it

it would be a positive change in contesting.

It would give the casual contester more

incentive to be more involved rather than

get into the contest distribute the

obligatory contacts to the major contesters

and let it go at that.
73 Joe Cagnina WA4JUK


Posted by wa4juk on March 9, 2003

A 24 hour WW contest
Let's look at this in terms of station size, and propagation. If someone is a smaller station, a 48 hour contest gives them (in theory) two chances to work someone at a given point in time on a band. And usually, on the second time around, that's a lot easier to do.

With a 24 hour contest, you've only got once chance. The pileup madness increases exponentially. The nastiness follows, exacerbated by packet spots. Those of us who are dedicated contesters stay. Those who aren't, no longer bother.

Why is that an issue? Because in any contest, it's not how many of the big guns you work that matter--it's how many of the small stations that only make a handful of contacts that *you* work that no one else does. And when those guys all go away, we can all just work each other, and be done in about four hours. What fun is that?

Posted by NF1J on March 7, 2003

24-hour test
I am not concerned much that there might even be many individuals who might normally operate more than 24 hours and would decide to cut back to 24. I'm thinking that they might operate the 24 more seriously than the 28 or 30 they might normally do...attempting SO2R, running more and the like - in the end, making more QSOs. To me that would be an improvement over a more "casual" 30 hours.

73 Mike N2MG

Posted by N2MG on March 4, 2003

24 hr. Category
Great subject ! This idea can really help "level" the playing field. Coupled with "antenna" categories, we can really start to rate operating skill and increase participation. We just have to hope that it doesn't take away from the motivation to compete in the "heavy metal" & "marathon" categories.

Posted by kd2rd on March 3, 2003

24 hour CWC
Surely this new category will increase participation.
There are a lot of guys (casual contest ops) who because
of different reasons never operate full 48 hrs.
Rules as they are now do not encourage them to participate
seriously. A new 24 hour ( chosen from 48hrs with rest periods)
category will make them committed and they will take part seriously
which surely means more QSOs done by this kind of operators.
So, go for it contest sponsors, this will be appreciated by everyone
big and small guns.

73's Wally LZ2CJ(LZ8T),team member LZ9W & YM3LZ

Posted by LZ2CJ on March 3, 2003

more motivation
I am in favor of the CWC concept. From the black hole, I can't even begin to think about a top ten score with my quad and wires. In addition, I have trouble staying motivated just trying to compete with the likes of W9RE, N9RV and others my area. I just can't be competitive with these guys on my 3/4acre lot. A CWC would keep me motivated enough to put in a solid effort for a subset of the overall contest hours, thus generating more QSOs from my station (not to mention allow me some family or sleep time). The only concern I have is that 24hrs is just short of what I seem to normally operate. I guess it would depend on what the average 'on' time is for guys like me.

Posted by n9se on March 3, 2003

24 hour CWC
I think the idea has merit. It wouldn't affect me as I usually do 40+ hours. We need to be careful about the details though:

- can you pick your best 24 hours? or is 24 hours total, the limit.
- if you are Single Band and end up working less than 24 hours, can you submit for an all band entry here?
- An award for Africa, Pacific, and Asia would be really good to encourage more activity from there.

I think it will encourage activity rather than diminish it.

73,

Ed N1UR

Posted by N1UR on March 3, 2003

24Hr entry in a 48Hr
I would like to see such a class. Not only for the people with time constraints, and commitments,
But, for the world contesting community. Granted, the contest periods are best suited for the US
population, Starting at 4:00PM West Coast, and 7:00PM east coast FRIDAY nights local time. I am in the process
of relocating to ZL, where the contests will start at 12:00 Noon Local time on SATURDAY, and end on Monday afternoon.
I think a 24 Hr CWC could bring more participation from the other continents, and foster greater competition.

Posted by W3SE on March 2, 2003

24 hour segment
Fantastic... with family and work commitments dedicating a full 48 hours to a contest is impossible. A 24 hour option would 'guarantee' more operating from this station!

Posted by VK4JSR on March 1, 2003

A 24 hour CWC...
I've voted that it wouldn't affect me. The reason for this is that I'm strictly a guest op/hired gun. I've not had a station myself in a very long time.

That said, I do find the idea intriguing. But I too, would be very weary of 24 hours becoming more populated than the 48 hour main gig. IMHO.

Posted by K5ZM on March 1, 2003

To post a comment, you must be logged in.

If you are not a member, become one now!