Category: survey

One thing that adds to the unique nature of the WPX Contest is that single operator entries are limited to a maximum operating time. While there have always been a few operators who chaffed at the idea of having to get off the radio, most people seem to enjoy the ability to be competitive without the stress of going sleepless for two days! For many years the limit was 30 hours. Even though it has been 20 years since the limit was raised to 36 hours, we are still getting requests to return to the 30 hour limit. The survey seemed like a great opportunity to find out what the participants think.

Q7. Should the maximum operating time for the Single-Operator category be…

36 hours (no change)	1957	49.6%
48 hours (no limit)	925	23.4%
30 hours	577	14.6%
Don’t care	351	8.9%
Other	136	3.4%
Total	3946

The clear winner was to stay with the current 36 hour operating time limit. Second choice, in a bit of a suprise to me, was to have no limit! 

Among those voting for Other, the most common suggestion was 24 hours. Other suggestions:

• It would be great to have operating time categories, esp. for those who do not have the full weekend for the game
• There should be 48 and 24 hour categories
• 24 hours at any time in the 48 hour window.  Breaks must be 2 hr minimum
• 24 hours in three times
• Choice of either a 6-hour entry or a full 36 hour entry
• 24 hours of 48 hours in 4 hour minimum QRV periods

There were many additional comments made for this question. Some of the more interesting include:

• 36 hours is why old men like this contest so much.
• I stopped entering competitively when this was changed. At 30 hours our distance disadvantage is partly neutralised. At 36 it is just another northern hemisphere test.
• I’m not totally against leaving it at 36 hours, but as the ham radio population ages I think it would encourage more serious participation if the operating time was shorter rather than longer.  I’d rather see the emphasis on skill than endurance.
• Us older ops need our sleep…
• Look at the SARTG contest, that is split in 3 time slots. That is very fine for the ‘family’ operator.
• This seems a reasonable maximum that doesn’t encourage people to go completely without sleep, but provides scope for those with stamina to do better.
• 36 hours is a good balance between contest operating and home/family.  Most of us have to work on the Monday morning and need some rest!
• The best operators in the world are probably over 60.  For people over 60 or 70, even 36 hours puts a physical and psychological stress that is hard to endure.  You could easily be the best CW op in the world, but not have the stamina for 48 straight hours. A contest should be a test of skill, not of unreasonable and youthful physical and psychological stamina.
• WHY do you set a limit?  Everybody is responsible for his own health. I would like to operate full 48 hours without limits…
• I liked it when WPX was only 30 hours. This meant a possibility to compete very seriously from the poor propagational area as Finland is. Now it is very difficult to compete because we very rarely have a decent propagation for 36 hours in Finland. With the existing operating time I don’t try to win anymore but try to operate for fun. If the operating time would be 30 hours I think that I would try more seriously and I would think that many people with families might also try a bit more seriously. The same situation is with the aging contesters.
• There are plenty of contests with shorter operating time… if you’re serious and want to win, you’re sleep strategy should be part of your plan.
• It’s fine as is.  Allows people to rest for 12 hours.  One of the things I like about WPX.
• This is one of the major contest for the year – don’t change this rule or all the records will be in obsolete.
• To allow very part time operators, please provide a 12 hour category.
• More and more competitors are seniors who can no longer do 48 or 36 hours.
• Diluting the contest for the ‘I can’t do it’ crowd is not fair to the people that can.
• How about this – a half time category – so everyone that can only operate half the time of the contest compete against each other, those that can afford the full contest period compete against those
• In a contest you should strive to have the maximum number of signals on the air at all times. Let there be as much fish in the pond as possible at all times so everyone has a chance to catch the maximum number of fish based on their skills.
• It is nice to have a contest where I can get some sleep. Managing the ‘off time’ makes for interesting strategy.
• Forcing the single op to decide where the off time(s) will come makes him consider propagation issues and rest planning, adding to the needed skill set for winning.
• 36 hours is OK, but 48 hours would be much more interesting.  30 hours would be bad, creating large gaps in activity on Sunday like it used to many years ago, when most people had to use up their operating time real quick to avoid the ‘wasteland’ on Sunday.  If necessary, keep it as it is.
• Divide contest into short 2-3 hr brackets and permit operation only during ‘x’ number of the time brackets. Keep point counts down and give low power, inexperienced operators a chance to get involved also! Some of us aren’t competitive; can’t affort big gun stations, and don’t have ‘x’ hours to sit through a contest to build up count totals. We might give a short block or two of time to get a certificate of attaining some set number of QSOs for the contest, just to get involved.
• As I approach my 60th birthday I am appreciating 36 out of 48 in a contest!  But…you know what…there can never be too much contest time!
• Like to see a best 12-hour, best 24-hr and/or best 6-hr categories for individuals who don’t have all weekend to operate.
• I like the 36 hour format.  It allows for some sleep (as we get older, 48 hours is darn hard), but also involves some strategy as to *when* to take time off.  With 48 hours, that is lost.
• Mixed opinions about this, do like the 36 hour format, but there are times when being able to work more would be nice. Too bad we can’t pick the best 36…
• Why not introduce a single Casual contester for 10 HRS no limitation of time on and off so to bring more SMALL STATION TO STAY ALIVE in the contest.
• Why allow multi-ops to operate the entire period and not single ops? Doesn’t make sense. If the contest is 48 hours long, then all stations should be able to operate for the entire period.
• Have a 5 or 10 day long contest! That will take care of the lazy ones…and, will enable you to award the IRONMEN of our sport, eh?

This is only a small sample of the comments!  As you can see, there are many different views on this topic. It makes my job as contest director very interesting.

I am open to the idea of creating a limited time category. However, I don’t want to give people a reason not to be on the air and making contacts!  What do you think is the best solution?

 

The Multi-Operator Single-Transmitter category covers a wide span of interests.  At the lower levels, it is a few friends enjoying radio together for the weekend.  At the top levels, it combines all of the strategy, competitive drive, and expense of Formula 1 car racing! With such a broad range, we wanted to understand how the participants feel about the current rules.

Q.  Have you ever operated in the Multi-Operator Single-Transmitter category in the WPX Contest?

Answer	Count	Percent
Yes	1275	32.8%
No	2614	67.2%

It was bit suprising to see such a large difference.  This could be a result of only sending surveys to the email address of the log submitter and not to each operator in the team.

Q.  Should the rules for the Multi-Operator Single-Transmitter category be changed?

For this question, we looked only at those who answered Yes to operating in the multi-single category.

	Count	Percent
10-minute rule with multiplier station (no change)	496	38.9%
10-minute rule	151	11.8%
Band changes per hour	433	34.0%
Don’t care	132	10.3%
Other	63	4.9%

An interesting result!  One that shows a lot of momentum in keeping the current rules, but also shows there is interest in a simpler alternative.

Comments

• The rule should be only one transmitter. Not transmitted signal. Enforcement is tricky but that is true on a lot of things.
• Having a multiplier station available to operate makes it much more interesting for the team as a whole. Going to a pure single Tx model would be a backward step.
• Only one transmitter connected and operational at any time — additional transmitters allowed on the premises but must be disconnected from power and/or antenna.
• The operation per hour brings more security against cheats, with outcomes that can be more real.
• Dump the second xmtr – ‘single transmitter’ should be single transmitter. Then you can dispense with any band-change rules.
• I lean toward keeping rules as simple as possible.
• 10 band changes/hr = 6minute rule
• This can be confusing in the heat of the moment
• I range between “10-minute-rule w/ mult station” and “10-minute-rule”. Reason: if “w/mult station” then the M/S category needs a setup like a M/2-station, and real Multi-OP-Single-TRANSMITTER (only one trx at all) are handicaped. I’d prefer a clear possibility for single TRANSMITTERS and then the M/2-Class. But on the other hand, the M/S-Class as is right now is very interesting also, and it would be pity to lose this class. This is a difficult decision and I hope you will find a good solution.
• 10-minute rule with multiplier station is the best improvement since previous rules change. Very good thing for strategy and active band scanning for second operator.
• Band changes / hour provide much flexible operation.
• When we say Multi-Operator Single-Transmitter, you mean many persons & 1 TR. By saying multiplier station you give the right to every body to have 5 stations looking all together for multiplier. When you say Single-Transmitter, I mean ONLY 1 TR and not 2nd-3rd-4th-5th stations for multipliers.
• Abolir regla de los 10 minutos, libertad de cambios en bandas para la multiplica-dora
• Time to get rid of the 10 min rule period! SINGLE TRANMITTER is just what it says.
• MultiSingle with Mult station is a 2 TX Multi
• This is all to complicated to keep up with so would never try to operate this category
• I love the logistic for all our operators to fullfill this rule 
• Why limit band changes at all??? I never understood the reasons for this rule.
• SINGLE TRANSMITER means just that — NOT TWO RADIOS. If the entrant wants to use two radios great— just put them in a different category.
• I can live with any of them, though band changes per hour is probably easier to keep track of than the current rule.
• My wish: After M/2 was introduced, M/S should be changed to *one* radio only. Small stations with only one operating position can´t compete in the M/S category right now. Stations with two operating positions should change to M/2, which is more fun anyway…

As you can see, there are very strong opinions on all sides!

The WPX Committee is carefully considering a change to the Multi-Single category rules for 2010. We believe that the addition of the Multi-Two category several years ago has created an imbalance.  There are essentially three multi-transmitter categories! There is currently no place for a station with only one radio to compete.  Almost any top level Multi-Single station can easily step up to the Multi-Two category. This gives us the opportunity to make an adjustment in the rules to create more opportunity for more stations.

The choice is:

1. Keep the multi-single rules as they are.  [A run station and a multiplier station each on its own 10-minute timer.]

2. Change the multi-single rule to allow 8 or 10 band changes per hour. [Only one transmitter which could change bands xx times during each hour. This would also match the rules for the WPX RTTY Contest.]

Please add your comments below or write to me (k5zd@cqwpx.com) before November 1. I want to hear your opinion!  Rule changes for 2010 will be announced before the end of November 2009.

 

 

When contesters get together, there are always debates about the contest rules and categories.  No debate is more passionate than the one around use of DX Cluster by single operator entrants.  Some major contests, such as WAEDC and the Russian DX Contest, have decided to allow any single operator to use the Cluster.  CQ sponsored contests have maintained the traditional Single Operator category that does not allow use of Cluster or DX spotting tools. Any use of these places an entrant in the Single Operator Assisted category.

WPX scoring, with its emphasis on QSO rate and large numbers of multipliers, has historically shown very little scoring difference between the Single Operator (SO) and the Single Operator Assisted (SOA) categories. One of the goals of the survey was to gauge opinion on whether the WPX Contest should continue with two single operator categories or combine them into one.

Q3. Should the Single Operator and Single Operator Assisted categories be combined into one category that permits all single operator entrants to use QSO alerting assistance (e.g., DX cluster, Internet chat, etc.)?

	3. Should the SO and SOA categories be combined into one…
2. Which phrase best describes your operating…		Yes	No	Dont care	Row Totals
	A serious competitor trying to win	430	473	65	968
		44.4%	48.9%	6.7%	24%
	Part time operator trying for the highest score possible	562	731	166	1459
		38.5%	50.1%	11.4%	36.2%
	Chasing contacts for WPX or other awards	232	225	82	539
		43.0%	41.7%	15.2%	13.4%
	Having fun and giving points to others	355	370	183	908
		39.1%	40.8%	20.15%	22.5%
	Other	48	77	35	160
		30%	48.1%	21.9%	4.0%
	Total	1627	1876	531	4034
	Percent	40.33%	46.5%	13.16%	100%

The results were relatively consistent across all competitive levels. Opinion is narrowly in favor of keeping SO and SOA as separate categories.

There were many excellent comments from both sides of the discussion.

Comments in favor of combining into one category

• DX Cluster is ubiquitous today and CW skimmer technology will soon be as well. Their usage can’t be checked by contest committee.
• It will stop the cheating which can not be enforced.
• Time to do this
• A rule that is not enforcible, like doping in other sports
• Everyone benefits by spots, even those who are not using it do when they are spotted. Spotting creates activity and contests need activity to be interesting. Bring it on!
• QSO alerting is now a normal part of operating
• How to watch if really SO never looking cluster. We doing live with our “age of technology”.
• I think, that many people uses DX-Cluster, but select Non-assisted category.
• It is 2009, let’s use whatever is available to the amateur. After all, the operating technique in the pile-ups decides the score.
• Yes, because today all the people have access to dxcluster and many send log unassisted, when in reality are assisted.
• Partial calls checking in contest software, DXpedition`s previews, etc. are the same thing as cluster help.
• If computer logging is allowed, the rest is just a natural extension.
• Cluster permited for all but not self-spotting.
• I figure its almost impossible to police the non use of assistance – if your interest is purely to increase activity – make it as simpleas you can for the everyone.

Comments against combining into one category

• Internet infrastructure may not be available in remote area even in JA.
• Absolutely not. I strongly oppose to chats where QSO’s are lined up telephone book style. _Watching_ a cluster is somewhat different, but still there should be a category that is all about radio skills, without assistance.
• NO, NO NO. Many of us don’t haver reliable interenet service, or prefer not to use anything to put us in assisted. We prefer to do our contesting without others helping us.
• I would stop entering the contest if there were no pure single op category.
• No, no and one more no. I think that it’s no so good idea. DX clusters, etc. are OK for every day working when we have more time for experiments, but for Contest the Operator should be show his expirience and skils.
• What to do with stations which realy doesn’t have have access to DX cluster.
• It doesn’t seem right to use non-amateur means of communication for the purpose of increasing scores in amateur radio contests.
• Absolutely not! There should be a seperate category for those not welded to the cluster network. Additionally I would like to see firm action taken by the contest committee (not just in wpx!) against those who enter as unassisted when in fact they are assisted.
• Should always have a category for Single Op Unassisted. If you want fewer categories, better to combine assisted with Multi Single.
• This year I entered SO. It was twice the fun to find mults myself. I’d like to keep these separate.
• The contest should be a competition for the operator not for the electronics all over the world.

Those in favor seem to feel that cheating is pervasive and the only way to stop it is by putting everyone into one category.  This is disappointing to me and reflects one of the major concerns of radio sport. Those against a combined category point to the skill building and more fair competition that having seperate SO and SOA categories encourage.  Both sides make valid points. Given how even and intense the opinions are, we will continue with the separate SO and SOA categories for 2010. It is up to the contest community to apply peer pressure against those who use the Cluster and then enter in the SO category.

 Q4. If all Single Operators are combined into one category – should they be allowed to use frequency decoding technology such as Skimmer?

Just to see if there should be any limitation on the combined category, we asked one more question about Skimmer-type technology. Given the decision to continue with separate categories, this result is presented only for completeness.

The results below are ONLY for those who were in favor of combining the categories.

	Count	Percent
Yes	701	44.3%
No	607	38.4%
Don’t care	274	17.3%
Total	1582	100%