K5WLF Home Page -- Rebel Wolf Online

THE CONTEST THING

In the January 2008 issue of QST Magazine, the official publication of the ARRL, Andrew Eaton, VE7REF, wrote a letter bemoaning the fact that on many, if not most, weekends, the bands are covered with contesters from one end to the other. All he asked for was that contest organizers or sponsors restrict the action to a portion of the band, leaving non-contestors some bandwidth to operate in while the event was underway.

His letter was answered by ARRL's Contest Manager, Sean Kutzko, KX9X, who quoted Rule 97.101 which states that "no frequency will be assigned for the exclusive use of any station", and went on to say that "if you're not interested in contesting . . . you have plenty of alternatives available to you." He then went on to point out, rather condescendingly it seemed to me, that contesting is prohibited on the WARC bands and that if "you feel the phone bands are too crowded, you can operate CW, RTTY or other digital modes. If there's a contest on HF, you could operate SSB or CW on VHF." He ended his response by saying that "Part of the fun of Amateur Radio is exploring new bands and modes of communication . . .."

I'm not a contester, never will be. But I have no problem with those who enjoy that particular aspect of our hobby. However, there are problems that are caused by limited available bandwidth, x number of contesters, y number of non-contesters and everyone's enthusiasm for their own operating modes and preferences.

One of the main problems is that good operating practice is sometimes sacrificed in the quest for one more contact, grid or entity. For example, on a recent weekend I dialed up 40m PSK31 on my rig and started DigiPan. I wasn't pleased when ALL 26 'channels' of my display filled with:

CQ CQ CQ PSK DEATHMATCH CQ CQ CQ PSK DEATHMATCH DE <CALL REDACTED> PSE K

I couldn't make contact with the station to advise him that his signal could have benefitted from a reduction in audio level, but I wish I could have. As it was, I just turned off the rig and read a book. I don't believe that anyone chooses to ignore good operating practices when they enter a contest. I do know that it's possible to overlook certain things in the desire to win. Sometimes folks get stuck in the "more power" or "more drive" syndrome and don't take the time to ask for a signal quality report. So, contesters, I ask you -- please don't give up proper operating practices and simple courtesy in the hunt for one more multiplier. And, non-contesters, the same goes for us as we co-exist with our fellow hams.

Now, let's address the issue raised by our brother to the north. I do not believe that it should be necessary for us non-contesters to give up an entire band or all the non-WARC bands, or change to a different mode, merely to accomodate a contest. There IS a solution available and it is totally dependent on the organizers and sponsors of the various contests. Will this solution I propose satisfy everyone? No, it will not. It is a compromise and, as such, will probably not totally satisy anyone. But, it's a possible solution to this ongoing problem.

If the organizers of a contest can specify it as, for example, a 20 m SSB contest, they can just as easily specify it as a contest for a portion of the 20 m band. In the rules they could simply state: "This contest is for the 14.250 MHz to 14.350 MHz portion of the 20 m band ONLY. QSOs on any frequency outside of this range will not be accepted for scoring." As I said, it won't make anyone completely happy, but we could probably live with it for a weekend. How about it, contest organizers, want to give it a try? Rule 97.101 doesn't really apply here -- it's up to y'all.