CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] WPX Spot Analysis (NT5C)

To: cq-contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WPX Spot Analysis (NT5C)
From: Doug Smith W9WI <w9wi@earthlink.net>
Date: 05 Jun 2004 18:33:48 -0500
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
For comparison, using a "not-WPX" call:

On Sat, 2004-06-05 at 12:45, Jim George wrote:
> NT5C was spotted 25 times during the 36 hours I was operating during the 
> 2004 WPX CW contest.  The spots data were taken from the OH2AQ cluster 
> after the contest.  

W9WI was spotted ten times in somewhat less than 36 hours.  I ended up
with roughly 1,250 QSOs.  (including dupes)

> produced, I counted the number of contacts in the ten minute period before 
> the spot and the ten minute after the spot.  Interestingly, only six of the 
> twenty five spots were from stations I could identify from the log.  

The proportion was similar in my log.  (considering the small sample
size)  Only three of the calls that spotted me were in my log.  Two
(NJ1F and RF4R) were worked at the same time as they spotted me.  (RF4R
spotted me two more times later in the contest)  The third (9A6XX)
spotted me several hours after we worked.

None of the spotters were in Tennessee.  RF4R was the only one to spot
me more than once.  I can assure readers K5NZ wasn't favoring Texans as
he was one of the W's who spotted me...

> The country locations were as following:

Country NT5C spots      W9WI spots
USA     17/25           5/10
Canada      3/25            none
Italy       2/25            none
Japan       1/25            none
UK          1/25            none
Belgium     1/25            none
Russia      none            3/10
        (all three by same spotter RF4R)
Croatia     none            1/10
Brazil      none            1/10
 
> The average number of QSOs in the "pre-spot" period was 9.6, and the 
> average number in the "post-spot" period was 12.8, for an increase of 3.2 
> QSOs, or more significantly 33%.

Average "pre-spot" was 9.0, "post-spot" was 8.2 for a *decrease* of 0.8
QSOs or roughly 9%.  
 
> In the first portion of the contest, the increased rate was more 
> pronounced.  In the last twelve hours, some of the post-spot rates actually 
> were lower.  I suppose the supply of new stations to work was getting smaller.

In my case there seems to be no correlation between rate change and
time.  It is interesting to note that *every* time I was spotted by a W,
my rate declined; with one exception, every time I was spotted by a DX
operator, my rate increased.  

I have no idea what conclusion to draw from that!

> In general, I think this supports the use of "WPX" prefixes, as they get 
> spotted more than "plain Jane" prefixes, and the spots do result in 
> increased activity immediately following the spot.

While more analysis would be necessary I do tend to concur.

Which certainly disagrees with advice I gave N4ZZ (who luckily ignored
it!) before the contest...
-- 
Doug Smith W9WI
Pleasant View (Nashville), TN  EM66
http://www.w9wi.com

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

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