CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Committee Restructured

To: CQ Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Committee Restructured
From: Richard King <k5na@ecpi.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 13:29:49 +0000
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
I don't usually speak up in these kinds of discussions. But this was one of
the solutions that was tossed about last week when me and some other local
guys were talking at lunch about CQWW scoring.

Personally, I like this solution the best because:

1. It solves the problem of contestants being required to work zero point
QSOs. That just isn't right.

2. It has minimal effect on scoring and previous records.

3. It doesn't change the concept and theme of the CQWW as a 'DX Contest'
where you only work DX.

It may require a little minor 'tweaking' of contest software.

73, Richard - K5NA

On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 10:13 PM, Ed Sawyer <sawyered@earthlink.net> wrote:

> There is a MUCH MORE SIMPLE way to kill half of the objections being made
> and that come around every year.  Just have a default "own country and
> zone"
> double mult added for the first Q on each band.  Then eliminate ALL in
> country Qs.  The zero point Qs vaporize.
>
>
>
> And I will restate, it's a DX contest, not a everyone works everyone
> contest.
>
>
>
> Plenty of other contests are like that.  Please patronize those and enjoy.
>
>
>
> CQ DX is the best contest because it IS what it is.
>
>
>
> Ed  N1UR
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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>