[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Running vs SP (Was Self Spotting)

To: Cqtestk4xs@aol.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Running vs SP (Was Self Spotting)
From: rwmcgwier@comcast.net
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 18:57:25 +0000
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
How do you enforce such a distinction?  What is to stop me from running
for 1/2 hour, S&P for 1/2 hour and still getting 2 pts per Q?  I have heard
some lulu's here but this one just about takes the cake for being in the
"let's make everybody happy by giving them a category they can shine in"
category.  On the enforcement, with almost open and shut cases of self-spotting,
we can't get that rule enforced.  This will be almost as  hard to enforce as 
stopping guys from submitting QRP scores while running 100w.

> I'm not penalizing broadcast stations that sit on
> one frequency making 100 Q's per hour; their 
> year-to-year scoring would not be changed.
> I'm suggesting that non-CQing stations should receive
> 2x points for those contacts, because S&P rates are
> one half of the run rates.
> That would bring parity in scores for those that can
> run with those that can't, but still work just as hard.
> Barry
> ........ As a "broadcast station who makes 100 QSOs" and hour I find your 
> ideas not 
> totally accurate.
> My score would be changed
> A good operator who is having a 200 plus hour is working just as hard as one 
> who is S/Ping, but in a different way.  Not every station who calls in is 20 
> over and in the clear.  We too are hearing lots of QRM/QRN and QSB.  However, 
> we battling all those while trying to pull S2 signals out of the crud to 

> continue the run. We are the ones who work just as hard to as the guys who 
> are 
> working QRP.  We have to copy the ESP signals that we receive.
    The world's top contesters battle it out in Finland!
THE OFFICIAL FILM of WRTC 2002 now on professional DVD and VHS!

CQ-Contest mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>