[WRTC2006] Home Areas

[Georgens, Tom]

I applaud the Russian team for taking the lead in organizing and
managing a project as complex as WRTC-2010.  Accordingly, with that
responsibility comes the right to set the rules they believe are the
most appropriate.  However, in the spirit of transparency, there has
always been dialogue about the rules prior to their finalization to
avoid any unintended consequences.  Consistent with this, Harry has been
very available and forthcoming in his responses.  While the rules cannot
possibly satisfy everybody, I completely respect that the hosting
committee has the right make the final determinations. Most
"suggestions" for improvement are rooted in a grievance or desire to
improve one's chances of qualifying.  I admit that I would be included
in that.  

A major source of controversy is the geographical assignments of the
teams and the determination of the nominee areas. The nominee areas will
always be difficult and I am not sure I have any suggestions, short of
mini WRTC qualification rounds.  However, the assignment of a specific
number of teams to nominee areas seems to be a source of controversy
that is entirely unnecessary.  It is nearly impossible to decide on a
satisfactory split of US versus Europe, Eastern Europe versus Western
Europe, etc.  I do not understand why it is even necessary to attempt to
solve this problem.  Why not just have a range?  For W1-2-3-4, instead
of fixing three nominees, why not say at least one nominee and no more
than double the current allotment.  This would only hard-assign around
half of the teams but would still guarantee broad geographic
representation.  The rest of the teams would be solely determined by
total normalized point score, regardless of home area or where the
points were earned.  This would make the qualification entirely
merit-based without having to meticulously determine the splits
beforehand.  Likewise, it would lessen the concern about points earned
outside of the area, since qualifiers such as myself would not be taking
vital spots from people in my home area as they would be competing for
up to twice the number of spots currently available to them.

The hard assignment of areas, and the complexity of dealing with points
earned outside of the area when there are only 2 W6-7 spots available,
leads to the 4 "DX" operations rule.  While I have a vested interest, it
does not seem to be in the spirit of merit-based qualification.  Points
earned in CQWW, the most challenging and competitive contest, will not
count after 4 events while I try to score a few points in W6 land in
second tier contests.  Gaining high normalized points in a low activity
(from W6) contest like WAE is a far more modest accomplishment than
scoring in the CQWW, yet the former is more relevant to the selection
process.  It seems like points should count, no matter where they are
earned. If it were not for the pre-determined assignment of all teams by
geography, there would be no need for this contrived rule.  Even given
the assignments, it seems that not counting the most important contest,
and giving reasons for contest operators to not got to DX locations is
not in the spirit of the competition nor in the broader best interest of
contesting.

To compound matters for me personally, the 2005 CQWW, which did not
count for 2006, does not count for this event either.  I already planned
both modes for this year but I still need to find 4 more contests to
mount serious efforts in 2008 to be eligible.  I realize that WRTC is an
elite event, and significant personal commitments on behalf of those
wishing to qualify should be expected.  Nonetheless, it hurts to lose
high value events that I had, admittedly, mistakenly assumed would have
counted.  If the CQWW is deemed to be the ultimate measure of
proficiency, then why have years that are ineligible?  What hurts for
those of those us subject to the 4 DX rule is that, at this late date we
have a relatively short period of time to accumulate the final four
operations from inside the territory.  To lose prior operations makes
things worse.  At the very least, given the surprising new rule, and our
limited time to adjust, I would respectfully request that the high value
contests since the WRTC2006 qualification cutoff should count.

As with all people suggesting rule accommodations, I have a personal
interest in the outcome.  Especially as it is unlikely I will get in the
required operations in my home area.  Nonetheless, I could not with good
conscience make suggestions that were inconsistent with merit-based
selection or fairness.  Of course, the Russian team has the total right
to set the rules and I completely respect any outcome they produce.

I should add one additional point.  In the last WRTC, the most common
comment made by the participants before the event was that "it all
depends on the draw."  It seems like the Russian organizers will have
equalized the stations to a degree not possible in the past.  It should
be a tremendous competition.  Whether as a competitor or a spectator, I
look forward to a great event

73, Tom W2SC 
8P1A 8P5A 
Living in W6
Currently in VP9

What is my home area again?