[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Improving the Fabulous CQ 160 Contest

To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Improving the Fabulous CQ 160 Contest
From: "Tod -ID" <tod@k0to.us>
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 12:43:00 -0700
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
It has been said that "plagiarism is the sincerest form of flattery". 

I am in agreement with the thought that it would not be appropriate to
"imitate" the Stew Perry Contest. However, it might be appropriate to
incorporate a key feature of that contest -- the grid square as a part of
the exchange -- in a revised CQ 160 Contest.

Tom's ,VE3CX, comments about considering the effect/challenge for casual
operators who participate in the CQ 160 certainly deserves consideration. I
can imagine that the revised exchange would become "59(9), Section {or DX
entity) and  Grid-Square. If one did not know their grid square they could
send AA11 as the grid square and the scoring could simply allocate the
minimum amount of points to that particular QSO. [Section/DX Multipliers
would be multiplied times the QSO point total]

The interesting thing with including both the Section and the Grid-Square is
that there will continue to be motivation to make a "sweep" as well as
motivation to work hard to get the distant Grid-Squares for QSO point

Since there is no multiplier for QRP/Low Power and there would be a
multiplier for number of Sections/DX worked, the proposed "NEW CQ 160 would
hardly be considered to be 'cheapening' the Stew Perry. At the same time,
persons participating in order to achieve WAS or capture DX entities would
have that information from the exchange as opposed to a somewhat arcane grid

Tod, K0TO

CQ-Contest mailing list

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