CQ WPX Contest Blog

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%

 

The WPX is a major contest with participants from all over the world.  I was looking for a way to learn more about the participants and their interests in the contest. With Internet technology, it is very inexpensive to design and manage a survey. The responses greatly exceeded all expectations!

On August 8, 2009, the survey was sent to 9,483 email addresses exported from all submitted logs in WPX SSB and CW for 2008 and 2009.  Only 597 were rejected as being bad email addresses. There were 4,811 people who clicked on the link in the invitation email and visited the survey site. Of these, 3,415 completed the survey — an amazing 36% response rate! Even more so when you consider that most of the WPX Contest participants are from non-English speaking countries!

After the response rate slowed from the invited emails, the survey was opened up to all contesters. This generated additional responses, but did not signficantly change the results of any question.

While the numeric results were very valuable, it was the comments that made the survey worthwhile. WPX participants are passionate about the contest and how it should be managed. Of course, for every comment advocating change, there was someone else saying not to change.

The first question was designed to allow participants to declare their competitive level in the contest.

Answer	Count	Percent
A serious competitor trying to win	1,013	24.39%
Part time operator trying for the highest possible score	1,484	35.72%
Chasing contacts for WPX or other awards	556	13.38%
Having fun and giving points to others	938	22.58%
Other	163	3.92%
Total	4,154	100%

WPX participants are competitive!  Both at the top levels and with themselves. It is also gratifying to see so many who are enjoying the fun and helping to give out points. It will be interesting to see how the responses differ depending on the self-assigned competitive level.

Examples of the comments:

• Part time operator trying to break a record for my call area.
• Using as much time as possible to compete but aware of my family responsibilities
• A semi-serious competitor trying to rank high within my contest club
• Serious competitor chasing WPX & DXCC countries
• Improving skills and besting last year’s score
• Doing as well as possible considering age and equipment/antennas. Mainly to add score to a contest group.
• Part time operator attempting to reach a predetermined goal for number of prefixes worked.
• I enjoy working DX and I would like to make myself a better operator in contests so I have to practice and I would like to have a lot of fun.
• Serious “little pistol” practicing my contesting skills
• In this big contest, where to this little signals all OM give a lot of attention, it is a good chance for QRP work.
• Part time operator seeking for new QSL cards taking this very active occasion.

Experience

 Q25. How many years have you been operating in contests?

There were 3,736 respondents who answered this question.  The average experience was 18.6 years. Contesting needs to promote the challenge and fun we enjoy to younger operators!

Answer	Count	Max	Average
A serious competitor trying to win	893	88	21.0
Part time operator trying for the highest possible score	1381	72	17.9
Chasing contacts for WPX or other awards	482	63	16.2
Having fun and giving points to others	832	58	18.3
Other	148	55	19.1
Total	3,736	88	18.6

 

Next time we will start looking at the results of the rule change questions.