[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Trending contest activity

To: <kr2q@optonline.net>, <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Trending contest activity
From: "Richard DiDonna NN3W" <nn3w@cox.net>
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 21:34:42 -0400
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Are scores a really valid measure at this point?  While full scale SO2R has 
been around for several years, the inclusion of ready to travel SO2R 
technology and computerization has dramatically increased operator 

73 Rich NN3W

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <kr2q@optonline.net>
To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 7:24 PM
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Trending contest activity

Interesting thread and numbers. I like the suggestion of tracking scores. 
Looking at mults wouldn't hurt either. One caution. Be sure to compare 
apples to apples in terms of SFI.That is, look at activity which is in 11 
year blocks (~2006 to ~1995 or so). The CQWWDX "handbook" had a plot like 
that (as I recall) and there is a pretty correlation between sfi and 
activity (number of logs).As for VHF/UHF, as an HF contester, I tried it 
maybe 20 years ago...rather slow, kinda boring unless you get really psyched 
by tiny openings which are "cool" by some measure. On a band like 2m, you 
have to be a CQ machine and hope to snag the casual Sunday morning types who 
make "one pass across the band" and turn the rig off. Compared to HF, you 
sure do a lot of CQing with relatively very little return. I just felt like 
I was rev'ing at 8,000 rpms but only moving at 5kph. Im sure things may have 
changed dramatically in the last quarter century. LOL.de Doug KR2Q
CQ-Contest mailing list

CQ-Contest mailing list

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