Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Restoring\s+High\s+Band\/Low\s+Band\s+categories\s+in\s+ARRL\s+DXTest\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Restoring\s+High\s+Band\/Low\s+Band\s+categories\s+in\s+ARRL\s+DXTest\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Restoring High Band/Low Band categories in ARRL DXTest (score: 1): Author: k8cc@comcast.net (David A. Pruett); Date: Tue Jun 18 23:55:23 2002; I have to agree wholeheartedly with Dave. When the high and low band categories were created for the ARRL DX Contest in the middle seventies, it seemed to me like a great idea. To paraphrase Dave's p; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2002-06/msg00174.html (11,724 bytes)
2. [CQ-Contest] Restoring High Band/Low Band categories in ARRL DXTest (score: 1): Author: 00tlzivney@bsu.edu (Zivney, Terry L.); Date: Wed Jun 19 10:31:23 2002; Let me tell you why antenna- or propagation-challenged ops did NOT like the High/Low band categories in the ARRL DX test and why the single band categories were big improvements. Low band means you m; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2002-06/msg00177.html (12,085 bytes)
3. [CQ-Contest] Restoring High Band/Low Band categories in ARRL DXTest (score: 1): Author: dick.green@valley.net (Dick Green); Date: Wed Jun 19 15:41:34 2002; I can see the arguments on both sides of the High Band/Low Band debate, but what's the rationale behind allowing only one single-band entry? The ARRL DX rules make a pretty big deal out of prohibitin; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2002-06/msg00180.html (14,146 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]