CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Another view for 1-pointers

To: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <k4ik@subich.com>, <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Another view for 1-pointers
From: "Richard DiDonna NN3W" <NN3W@prodigy.net>
Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2005 08:52:47 -0500
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
This may be true, but isn't part of the rationale to 
significantly increase participation in a type of 
contest (RTTY) that is otherwise a distant third to 
the CW and phone tests?

73 Rich NN3W

--- Original Message ---
From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <k4ik@subich.com>
To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Another view for 1-pointers

>
>K4XS writes:
>
>> Possible solution: dissolve the lower 48 US into 48
>> countries, about equal to EU.  That would be fun, at
>> least for CQWW.
>
>Bill, the solution is to adopt the CQWW RTTY scoring 
rules.
>In CQWW RTTY, "own country QSOs" are worth one 
point.  In
>addition US States and VE Provinces are multipliers.  
Those
>changes would put US stations on (almost) even 
footing with
>European stations and would put the Caribbean/northern
>South America on an (almost) even footing with IH9, 
CAN,
>EA9, EA8, ZD8, etc.
>
>73,
>
>    ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>CQ-Contest mailing list
>CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-
contest


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

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