Some of the below is OK, But this part,
"Allow duplicate contacts in each 6 hour section eg over 24 hours you
can work the same station 4 times"
This would be a nightmare for everything. Including Duping!
K9XYZ operates, from 0100 to 0700, take a 1 hour break and gets back on
at 0800 and goes to 1400.
W9ABC Is a short timer and only Operates from 0400 till 1000.
W9ABC calls and works K9XYZ at 0600.
Later on K9XYZ calls to work W9ABC at 0800.
How is that worked? to K9XYZ it is a valid QSO but to W9ABC it's a Dupe.
On 6/25/2011 7:24 PM, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> Or to keep tradition retain the ARRL DX as is and create ANOTHER contest -
> mixed modes SSB and CW close to the September equinox for 24 hours only using
> grid squares and distance..
> 24 hours covers the shorter time frames proposed-
> 4 X 6 hour "sprints" inside the one test - allowing the time challenged to
> jump on for a 6 hour spurt - or even two or three -
> Allow duplicate contacts in each 6 hour section eg over 24 hours you can work
> the same station 4 times
> Distance based scoring
> Trent VK4TI
> --- On Sun, 26/6/11, David J. Sourdis - HK1A<email@example.com> wrote:
>> From: David J. Sourdis - HK1A<firstname.lastname@example.org>
>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Leveling the playing field
>> To: "CQ contest"<email@example.com>
>> Received: Sunday, 26 June, 2011, 6:12 AM
>> I think it would be interesting to try a double scoring
>> system; the current system and the distance-based system as
>> category overlay to see what happens. A simple algorithm
>> using the grid locators with six characters or the
>> coordinates to calculate distances. One point for each
>> thousand kilometers , being 0 to 1000 km worth one point. No
>> long path distances. Max score for a QSO would be 20 points
>> (19000 to 20000 km)
>>> From: Ed_richardson@shaw.ca
>>> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
>>> Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2011 20:35:18 -0500
>>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Leveling the playing field
>>> My initial reaction to this debate was, "lets do what
>> we can to level
>>> the field". However after reading some of the
>> excellent points on here,
>>> I am beginning to agree that a level field is a dream
>> and wouldn't be
>>> practical. Us folks from the middle of the continent
>> will not win a DX
>>> contest. Just too many skip zones to the major DX
>> population centers.
>>> However like others have said, setting realistic goals
>> and challenging
>>> oneself and other locals, should keep you motivated.
>> Personally I always
>>> try to better my last years score, or strive for some
>> target number of
>>> The fact that I will never win or likely ever place in
>> the top 10
>>> doesn't mean I wouldn't like to see some changes.
>>> Distance scoring, makes sense to me. I see no harm in
>> changing this. A
>>> east coast station may have the rate to Europe but
>> others Midwest and
>>> west coast stations will be reward with more points
>> even at a lower
>>> Another change to consider would be to turn the
>> contest into more of a
>>> sprint format. Meaning limit the number of QSO's on a
>> single frequency.
>>> Try and prevent the frequency monopolization of a few
>> big guns that
>>> scream bloody murder when propagation shifts and you
>> are in their skip
>>> zone. They come up on your frequency claiming your are
>> qrming them and
>>> they have been on frequency for 44 hours and to please
>> qsy. A 48 hour
>>> sprint would be a true iron man contest and would
>> eliminate the clusters
>>> and skimmers from playing a part. This would be more
>> of a test of
>>> operator skill!
>>> Just my $0.02006 cents worth (The Canadian dollar
>> being worth more than
>>> the US$ afterall)
>>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest mailing list