I strongly support your idea Brian! Just like in WAE. No need for CQ to be buying and sending out tons of paper. Also my thoughts anyway. Vy 73. Martin, LU5DX ________________________________________
LOL. All good points :-) Vy 73. Martin, LU5DX _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
I agree Tim. The reflector is mostly used to complain (myself incuded) but let's start a possitive wave of notes recognizing those who really shine. I know there were many, but I'd like to add: NH2T,
Hi Steve. I feel lucky! :-) I only had to wait for 19 Qs in my case for one the big boys to ID. Despite I use a cluster to populate the band maps, I don't call till I actually hear the DX callsign. B
I guess Jim was SOSB 10 meters this time around. Vy 73. Martin, LU5DX _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mai
Clap Clap Clap Dave! Nothing to add, but I do need to re-enforce one of your thoughts: Some people's logic is really wrong! They tend to call contesters who use DXCluser Hybrid Cyborgs or dunno what.
You bet! Not only his contesting skills but also his spirit and stamina are simply out of this world. Way to go John! Best 73. Martin, LU5DX _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest
Well, emails may not make the application (not only the server(s)) work faster, but maybe the ARRL will end up realizing that they need to move the LoTW to a big data solution. 461 Million records is
Hi Bob. Do you know who manages the LoTW yahoo group? I've sent a subscription request and my membership has been pending for approval for the past ten days or so. Also I'd like to know if there is a
Thx for the info Bob. I can't reach http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ARRL-LOTW/Description I see in that reflector you refer to a big log being processed today. In fact LP1H's log is over 100K Qs and 37
Ain't that a bit rude Doug? Please consider that you may not be able to hear station B sending his exchange to station A (the "frequency onwner"), because of cndx. Depending on the contest exchange a
I totally agree. But given the fact that many contesters don't even send "?" or "QRL?" and start CQing right away, I simply thought that waiting for a fair amount of time and then and only then (NOT
Very well explained Randy. Hopefully you won't face all kind of twisted arguments after this message, like those comparing ham radio contesting with fishing or boat sailing :-) As you said, at a seri
DARC ruined WAE? How's so? WAE seems to be the contest where the most skilled ops are present. And contest mechanics represent a challenge that goes beyond logging pre-known exchanges. I really belie
Not only you are a great op. You really see what's best sport in the long run (and in the short run too). Despite the fact that organizers spend a great deal of effort trying to catch packet cheaters
Sorry Steve. Your arguments do either 1) defy logic or 2) are poor resoning for not combining the categories. See my comments below. "...Written from the viewpoint of someone who is always on the rec
Exactly. That would surely ensure 100 % fair results for everyone. And that would make contesting a true competition, where you ONLY compete against yourself and see how well you can do. In fact, mos
Right. That's the case. And that is how CQ WW DX Contest was born in 1948. http://www.qsl.net/ct1boh/cqww/1948.PDF Scores where listed in descending order by zone. No distinction of ops, power or any
Hmmm. That Georgian wine works wonders :-) I believe only e few can speak with the authority of being part of the task force that makes producing CQ WW results a reality. You were part of that team a