Survey Results

Survey / Vote on ARRL's decision on DA0HQ and URE disputeThe Contest Community has voted. Almost 500 contesters particpated in the survey on ARRL’s recent decisions. As promised, I’m providing the results one day after the survey’s end for further discussion. Some of the answers are very clear, other’s should be refined. However here are the results without any interpretation or censorship. Take them, build your opinion and share your thoughts with us!

General Overview

In total 476 Contesters particpated in the survey. The graphic above shows the geographical distribution from where the participants came from.

Q1: Shall Headquarter stations be excluded from the IARU HF Championship results?

Options Votes Percent
Yes, there should be no more HQ competition 73 15,4%
No, HQ stations are a substantial part of this contest
and have deserved their own competition
376 79,7%
No opinion / Not sure 23 4,9%

Q2: Is it ok to introduce four weeks prior to the contest major changes in the rules of IARU HF Championship ?

Options Votes Percent
Yes, the contest sponsor / conduction organization
have this right; it’s their contest
104 22%
No, (major) rules must not be changed on such a short notice 354 75,2%
No opinion / Not sure 13 2,8%

Q3: Do you consider it as necessary to re-evaluate the rules of the IARU HF Championship for the upcoming years (2011+) ?

Options Votes Percent
Yes, especially the 1-3-5 punctuation rule 86 18,2%
Yes, especially the HQ category 209 44,5%
No, I like the contest in the way it has been (rules prior to 2010) 123 26,1%
I’m not sure / I have no opinion 31 6,6%
Other 22 4,7%

the “other” inputs:

  • HQ stations should get zero points for contacts within their country (4x)
  • 1-3-5 AND HQ Categorgy need a revision (3x)
  • EA8 may not count as EA
  • HQ-station location should get the same points as their HQ-office is adressed
  • Checking of Valid QSOs must become better

Q4: Would you consider the introduction of an IARU arbitration panel as useful?

Options Votes Percent
Yes, we need an additional instance with the empowerment
to take decisions and act as a referee
234 50,4%
No, the Contest conducting organization (currently ARRL) is sufficient.
The is no need for another administrative institution
190 41,2%
No opinion / Not sure 39 8,4%

Q5: Are you satisfied how ARRL has conducted the IARU HF Championship in the past? (until 2009)?

Options Votes Percent
Very unsatisfied 44 9,4%
Unsatisfied 77 16,5%
Neutral 161 34,5%
Satisfied 139 30%
Very Satisfied 44 9,4%

Q6: Are you satisfied with the recent decisions of ARRL in regard to IARU HF Championship 2009 and 2010?

Options Votes Percent
Very unsatisfied 186 39,7%
Unsatisfied 127 27,3%
Neutral 79 16,8%
Satisfied 44 9,4%
Very Satisfied 32 6,8%

Q7: Who would be your prefered organisation to conduct the IARU HF Championship?

Options Votes Percent
ARRL 153 33,6%
DARC 61 13,3%
SRR 62 13,5%
URE 11 2,4%
Other 170 37,1%

the “other” inputs:

  • An international, independent Board / Committee (44x)
  • IARU itself (40x)
  • RSGB (UK) (8x)
  • Alternating conductors with common regularities (e.g. like Soccer World Championship) (7x)
  • Anyone who agrees to conduct / do the work (5x)
  • REF (France) (3x)
  • none of the mentioned organisations (3x)
  • USKA (Swiss) (2x)
  • OEVSV (Austria) (2x)
  • Anyone but ARRL (2x)
  • neutral member (2x)
  • A non HQ competitor the year of the contest (1x)
  • ARI (Italy) (1x)
  • all except DARC and ARRL and ARI (also ARI is not adeguate at the role) (1x)
  • BARC (Boring Amateur Radio Club) (1x)
  • European multinational team accepted by IARU R1 (1x)
  • if the rules are fair and clear, it does not matter (1x)
  • last years champion (1x)
  • Independent, not with IARU affiliated organisation (1x)
  • SSA (Sweden (1x)
  • Someone who hates Cabrillo as much as me (1x)
  • This question makes no sense , organizers should have rights to submit rule change. Participants to request one. (1x)
  • United Nations (1x)

Q8: Do you agree that your log will be made public with the submission to the contest sponsor / conducting entity?

Options Votes Percent
Yes, all logs must be made public 396 84,6%
No, a log is a personal item and privacy should be respected 45 9,6%
No opinion / Not sure 27 5,8%

Q9: Does ARRL’s decision effect your participation in the upcoming IARU HF Championship 2010?

Options Votes Percent
Yes, I will reconsider my participation 206 43,9%
No, I will participate for sure! 191 40,9%
No opinion / Not sure 70 15,1%
About Tobias (DH1TW)

Self-confessed Starbucks addict. Loves to travel around the globe. Enjoys the technical preparations of Amateur-Radio contests as much as the contests themselves. Engineer by nature. Entrepreneur. For more, follow him @DH1TW

Comments

  1. Tobias,
    I was first very skeptical about your survey, but now I’m sure it was the right way. Thanks for providing such a good service for our Contest Community!

  2. Manuel de Aguilar EA8ZS says:

    1º Los logs que sean publicos
    2º Campeonatos de HQ SI
    3º Contactos con el propio pais (identidad) 0 (cero) puntos
    4º Vetados en los comites quien cometa irregularidades flagrantes en cualquier modalidad
    5º K1ZZ descalificado para siempre de cualquier comite por su incalificable y antideportiva actitud
    6º Tres años sin poder participar en el contest a los que cometan irregularidades

  3. Jim K0XU says:

    Personally I find the HQ competition to be a real pain. I think if they want to compete, let them administer their own competition and leave the rest of us to OUR contest. The HQ stations do more harm than good.

  4. ex-VR2BG/p says:

    A little look at what the fuss is all about:

    http://home.pacific.net.hk/~vr2bg/hrsa/analysis.html

  5. ex-VR2BG/p says:

    To what extent is the HQ competition one of work-your-own-country? Here I copy a post made a Bravo in BxHQ preparation discussion:

    其实我们真正的对手应该是:8N3HQ — JK3ZNB, 奈良市— 15m CW
    http://b47.photo.store.qq.com/http_…d793d&a=45&b=47

    去年的15mCW 在千叶县君津市的8N1HQ,历史成绩奈良的8N3HQ和东京大学的8N1HQ交替15mCW和ssb,成绩相当,所以可以参考:

    QSO Points Point/QSO Mults Score

    974 2,206 2.265 79 174,274

    同样的传播,为什么JA会遥遥领先呢,从Point/QSO来看,显然是有大量的1分台做支持,3分台和5分台不会超过50%,说明了仅日本本国为8N1HQ提供了500以上的qso。我们BY什么时候能普及到这个程度,尤其是CW也能普及到这个程度。

    The last sentence roughly translates as: “The similar dissemination, why JA will lead, looking from Point/QSO, has the massive 1 substation to make the support obviously, 3 substations and 5 substations cannot surpass 50%, explained only Japan was 8N1HQ has provided 500 above qso. When our can BY popularize to this degree, particularly CW can also popularize to this degree.”

    Though it should be noted that since 8NxHQ’s 15m stations were in JA1 & JA3, there is a bit of difference in what will be worked compared to BxHQ’s 15m stations in B7I & B7P-lands. Even in CQ WW CW 15m Asian record competition of years past, JA beats VS6. Of course same country Qs only good for at most two mults & no contact points in that contest, shows very clearly overall propagation advantage of being that further north (JA always works more NA, more Caribbean than we can down here).

    So I wonder now, to what extent are HQ entries in IARU a nationalism-driven local feeding frenzy? Is it really that important to the HQ competition? Seems like it is a sure fire way to success. In time, will we see perhaps incorrect presumption that such “incestuous” activity needs to be pursued & promoted in order to compete by other HQs? Or is it already too late?

    What a pity this all happened because apparently nobody looked closer at uniques in the HQ stations’ logs. And what might all this say to us about ARRL’s adjudication in other events?

  6. Hey Brett,

    thanks for the stats you performed! They are another peace in the puzzle. Peace by peace everybody will be able to create his / her proper opinion based on objective facts. Thanks!

  7. ex-VR2BG/p says:

    Hi Tobias! Is a little further refined now: http://home.pacific.net.hk/~vr2bg/hrsa/analysis.html

    What role uniques play for other than HQs would be interesting to see.

    I’m also curious to see how the survey results look based on where the respondent is from.

    It would be cool to see how respondents, participants & those who made contacts in the contest might relate.

    Participants by continent: 55.9% EU, 25% NA, 13.1% AS, 3.3% SA, 1.7% OC & 0.9% AF.

Speak Your Mind

*