Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Is\s+it\s+time\s+to\s+reevaluate\s+CQWW\s+\(2pts\s+analisys\)\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [CQ-Contest] Is it time to reevaluate CQWW (2pts analisys) (score: 1)
Author: "Felipe J Hernandez" <fhdez@islandnetjm.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2009 14:45:31 -0400
This is how the scores would look on a perfect world 2 pts per Q.. Perhaps we can confirm the assumptions of the previous posts or still feel that the scoring is unfair. Standing New standing Old ran
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-12/msg00147.html (13,393 bytes)

2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Is it time to reevaluate CQWW (2pts analisys) (score: 1)
Author: "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <w0mu@w0mu.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2009 12:38:16 -0700
Maybe V47NT spent a bit too much time focusing on the US? Would that not be a strategy that one must consider? CC Packet Cluster W0MU-1 W0MU.NET or 67.40.148.194 "A slip of the foot you may soon reco
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-12/msg00155.html (15,025 bytes)

3. Re: [CQ-Contest] Is it time to reevaluate CQWW (2pts analisys) (score: 1)
Author: "David Kopacz" <david.kopacz@aspwebhosting.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2009 15:00:32 -0600
Mike, I doubt that's the case. Having a great deal of experience operating from the Caribbean, I can tell you this: 1) there is a limited timeframe for working non US stations, such as Europeans and
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-12/msg00156.html (18,715 bytes)

4. Re: [CQ-Contest] Is it time to reevaluate CQWW (2pts analisys) (score: 1)
Author: "Marijan Miletic" <s56a@bit.si>
Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2009 18:53:36 +0100
KY1V wrote: The bottom line is that V47NT was the best operator and EF8M gets the plaque. I don't see fairness in that. EF8M repeated great 2008 DQ-ed score but this time G3SXW was behind him! I don'
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-12/msg00179.html (6,785 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu