Why not have a bit more publicity and transparency to allow a better
judging of such scores? An internet-based score list can easily inform
about the antenna system used (some european VHF-contests i.e. list
pwr, antennas and height asl). And why not publish the complete logs at
least at the time of result´s publication? One can work DX even on
80/160m with 5W. But that will happen only during those reasonable
openings noticed by other participants, too. And QRP won´t allow real
runs possibly clearly seen in a public log. The same for claimed qsos
on the highbands with DX difficult even for HP-stations. With all
claimed QSOs being public and comparable to all participants the value
of such a score can be estimated much better - which is also in the
interest of honest qrp-operators. Discussing distinct QSOs in the "peer
group" would be an improvement over the gut feeling with its doubts.
Maybe I´m too small a contester to understand the problems some have
with publishing logs - the ohhh so secret opening 2006 for sure won´t be
there 2007 and any opening good enough to produce a relevant amount of
qsos isn´t secret by nature. But maybe the "real contesters" know the
secrets.
Best 73, Chris (qrp&lowwires-section)
(www.dl8mbs.de)
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|