More than just DX News

How fair is the WRTC 2010 selection criteria?

How fair is the WRTC 2010 selection criteria?

The event is getting closer every day.

Many of us are in the process of preparation for this contest, but some contesters have already lost their chances for participation. For example, Radio-Sport website reports some losers from Russia, Ukraine and some other countries.

I understand that every episode is a tragedy for a Disqalified person. Some of those that had hoped to participate in the 2010 contest have now lost their chances. I would like to speak on the subject of Andrei Kazantsev UU0JM and his disqualification in the CQ WPX Contest. In his message on Radio-Sport Andrei resents the fact that the WPX Committee did not get in touch with him before the decision was taken. At the same time Steve K6AW writes: "The CQ WPX Committee has determined that your 2007 CQ WPX CW log submission for UU7J is in violation of CQ WPX rule IV.1.(a) - Single Operator, and has been disqualified. The rule states "one person performs all of the operating and logging functions." The committee has determined that you received assistance from packet spots throughout the contest which is in direct violation of the rules for this category"

Who is right?

Following the contest rules K6AW, as a head referee, is right, however the contests, hold by CQ Magazine, have been judged slightly different during the last few years, so no one could expect that K6AW would take responsibilities and take such a decision.

It totally differs from the way it happens in CQ WW DX Contest.
When judgement is started, K3EST sends out e-mails all over the world asking cautiously if the entrant displayed the correct category in his log submission. In some cases it happens even if an entrant "mixed up" categories in both SSB and CW contests.

Same thing happens if Bob has a suspicion that the entrant used the cluster or gained help from a 2nd operator. It is easier to move such operator to "assisted" category than to start inquiries. This is how we get our "champions" and "record holders" in Assisted category, first applied in in "not-assisted" category.
It is predictable that the number of such stations will increase every year, they violate contest rules without any risk, the maximum punishment they get is a message from K3EST with an offer to change submission category.

Bob, may be it is time to show a strong character?

So in anticipation of WRTC the decision of respectful Steve K6AW looks unfair because of the CQ WW Committee position - same rules violation in different contests, held by the same sponsor (CQ Magazine), is judged on different basis. In the case of the CQ WW DX an entrant is forced into changing his submission category, in the case of the CQ WPX an entrant is DisQualified. Moreover, in case of the CQ WW DX Contest an entrant gets a bonus like a high place in Assisted category and, possibly, a record.

Obtaining justice, I think that the UU0JM disqualification should be abandoned. Or, following the logics, they should abandon all category changes and disqualify those whose category was changed forcefully.

From my point of view the rule invented by Oms PY5EG on WRTC in Brazil is a great achievment. The rule says that Disqualified sportsmen can not participate in WRTC. The reason this rule was not implemented earlier is just to let the WRTC organizers to Disqualify the applicants selectively.

I hope WW committee will come to a fair decision so then the principle, stated by Oms PY5EG will really triumph over.

73 Al 4L5A

How fair is the WRTC 2010 selection criteria? comments forum

Your comments are important to us!

1 2 3 4 5