> IMHO, if accurate and thorough log checking is a good thing for
> contesting and a portion of the exchange makes that checking
> difficult, something IS broken.
Yes. The something that is broken is the LOG CHECKING. Let's
concentrate on fixing that as much as possible, rather than altering
the exchange, which is NOT broken.
> Using ITU zone in the DX exchange would accomplish that. ITU zone
> would not significantly impact the length or complexity of the
> exchange and hence keep comparisons to previous records valid.
> And,most contest participants are already familiar with ITU zone from
> the IARU contest.
IMO, this would turn ARRL into CQWW. One of the things I like about
ARRL is the unpredictability of the exchange. Even if you worked the
station before in the contest, the power might change from band to band.
If the exchange would include ITU zone, logging software would quickly
be "upgraded" to make the exchange completely predictable. I believe
this is a VERY undesirable result.
I would rather retain the current flavor of the ARRL DX contest, even
if it means there are a few people who will log BY4A instead of 6Y4A
without being penalized.
73,
Bob
--
+------------------- \-\-\-\ ----------------------------+
| Bob Schreibmaier K3PH | E-mail: k3ph@dxis.monroe.pa.us |
| Kresgeville, PA 18333 | ICBM: 40o55'N 75o30'W |
+--------------------------------------------------------+
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|