It's been a few years since this topic has been breached, but with the start of the new sunspot cycle, a fresh beginning, I fell it's time to open the discussion again. Isn't now a perfect time to re
Author: "Trent and Lorraine Sampson" <vk4ti@sampson.net.au>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 20:12:36 +1000
Hi Larry, 30 Hours would always advantage a particular time zone, from here (VK4) using the 36 hours I can strategise where the best runs will be, we tend to run USA and JA with some Europe. We are h
History has shown that the shorter time period enables more people to be competitive from more places around the world. For example, from W6, it is more likely to find 30 good hours that include Euro
Same from SM2! When it went to 36 hours I stopped operating in the WPX. During the 30 hour format some nice scores could be done from SM2, I made nr 1 EU on 21 MHz and nr 1 EU on 14 MHz back then. Th
Randy has summarized the situation very well. I think the 30-hour SOAB WPX format was very good, and I still think that the new 36-hour format is a mistake. I would love to see the contest go back to
And I guess that "big" derives more from the voice-power and competetive standing of those than from their number. In WWDX CW 2006 (having no time limit) about 15 percent of the SOAB-participants ope
The contest was a lot more fun the old way: 30 hours No one point QSOs within your own country - this used to be a fun **DX** contest, with USA mults but for zero QSO points. Check out for instance h
Operating WPX RTTY SOHP as P49X always ends long before the rate drops off. However, that's a poor reason for increasing the SO time period to 36 hours like CW and SSB are now. For all the rationale
And I would like to see this contest go back to 48 hours. o Contests are for operating o Sleeping is for non-contesters o Bands are for congesting At my house, Trey was always fondly known as "The Ki
Was it ever 48 hours? Not since I have been a contester - but I will have to defer to Jim on this point. I like the fact that we have 48 hour contests. I do not want the CQ WW or the ARRL DX or other
I think we would see a lot more participation in CQ WPX if the contest sponsors moved it back to 30 hours. The ground swell is building! 73, CU next weekend! Larry K4ABKC1F writes: > The contest was
IMO the issue isnīt if you can or canīt operate 48 hours. WPX was a special thing with itīs 30 hour format and special strategies was needed, as a bonus it gave some geographical areas a better chanc
It has been pointed out to me that my diminished enthusiasm for this contest has now apparently progressed to the point where I didn't know what weekend it is - D'OH ! I am however currently holding
I agree with Jim on this one. When we start cutting back on contest time to fit our aging sleep cycle, it is admitting that the end of contesting is at hand. When I hit 100 years of age, I want the W
I agree with this as well. My wife tells me that I don't like change - and she is right! I understand a lot of the arguments that are made for change in my head, but in my heart I wish they had, for
Hopefully the organizers of the lively IOTA-contest with a 12h out of 24h-category donīt read this - it is so bad to know to be a victim of apocalyse... Irony off: Any time reduction should be in rec
Hopefully the organizers of the lively IOTA-contest with a 12h out of 24h-category donīt read this - it is so bad to know to be a victim of apocalypse... Irony off: Any time reduction should be in re
I don't have a dog in the WPX hunt but will say that moving the CQ 160 contests from the (then) full 42 hours to 30 out of 48 hours total was one of the best things that ever happened to that contest
At no time did any of the advocates of 30 hours make the argument that it was due to needing sleep. All of the examples were around enhancing the competitive balance between various parts of the worl
I've been watching this thread for several days and keep thinking, "What would WPX be like with a 30-hour limit?" I didn't start serious contesting until after the move to 36 hours, so I don't know.