Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Running\s+vs\s+SP\s+\(Was\s+Self\s+Spotting\)\s*$/: 12 ]

Total 12 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Running vs SP (Was Self Spotting) (score: 1)
Author: Cqtestk4xs@aol.com
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 08:51:55 EST
I'm not penalizing broadcast stations that sit on one frequency making 100 Q's per hour; their year-to-year scoring would not be changed. I'm suggesting that non-CQing stations should receive 2x poin
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-03/msg00567.html (9,693 bytes)

2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Running vs SP (Was Self Spotting) (score: 1)
Author: rwmcgwier@comcast.net
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 18:57:25 +0000
How do you enforce such a distinction? What is to stop me from running for 1/2 hour, S&P for 1/2 hour and still getting 2 pts per Q? I have heard some lulu's here but this one just about takes the ca
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-03/msg00580.html (9,216 bytes)

3. Re: [CQ-Contest] Running vs SP (Was Self Spotting) (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Osborne" <w7why@charter.net>
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 20:00:31 -0800
hard as one who is S/Ping, but in a different way. Thats right, and not only during the contest. The station who is running 200 an hour has spend numerous hours working on his station so he can run 2
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-04/msg00000.html (8,513 bytes)

4. [CQ-Contest] Running vs SP (Was Self Spotting) (score: 1)
Author: "Barry N1EU" <n1eu@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2004 08:00:34 -0500
I concur with W5GN that there should be an incentive for SP vs running. Between the downturn in the sunspots forcing everyone to 20/15 during the day and the steady increase year after year in percen
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-04/msg00026.html (9,298 bytes)

5. Re: [CQ-Contest] Running vs SP (Was Self Spotting) (score: 1)
Author: Doug Smith W9WI <w9wi@earthlink.net>
Date: 02 Apr 2004 07:57:27 -0600
While not wishing to wade into this debate, I wonder whether this is something that will come to a head over the next few years? Something fundamental has changed since the last sunspot minimum: SO2R
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-04/msg00029.html (9,995 bytes)

6. Re: [CQ-Contest] Running vs SP (Was Self Spotting) (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Smith" <kk4ta@strato.net>
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2004 14:29:26 -0000
SP must be ok. There is even an SPDX contest this weekend and an SP club. Must be the opposite of the CQDX contest. Now is that the Self Spotting DX contest or the Seach and Pounce DX contest or just
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-04/msg00032.html (13,005 bytes)

7. Re: [CQ-Contest] Running vs SP (Was Self Spotting) (score: 1)
Author: "Alfred J. Frugoli (KE1FO)" <frugoli@worldlinkisp.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2004 13:02:11 -0500
Rate dictates this, not some external rule imposed by contesters or sponsors. If you can run, run. If everyone is running, you won't be able to, so you're rate will drop and you'll s&p. We've already
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-04/msg00037.html (10,808 bytes)

8. Re: [CQ-Contest] Running vs SP (Was Self Spotting) (score: 1)
Author: Steve Root <steve.root@culligan4water.com>
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2004 18:33:56 +0100
This raises an intersting point. If there are a larger number of stations operating SO2R, this would INCREASE the chance of a smaller station getting an answer to his CQ. The big boys aren't sitting
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-04/msg00039.html (11,862 bytes)

9. Re: [CQ-Contest] Running vs SP (Was Self Spotting) (score: 1)
Author: w9wi@w9wi.com
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2004 17:33:55 -0800 (PST)
Does that help the smaller station who *can't* call CQ because he can't find an open frequency among the big boys? Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View (Nashville) TN EM66 -- The world's top contesters batt
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-04/msg00050.html (9,036 bytes)

10. Fw: [CQ-Contest] Running vs SP (Was Self Spotting) (score: 1)
Author: "Rex Maner" <k7qq@netzero.net>
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2004 03:16:54 -0000
Not Runninjg any Pkt here but might be convinced to hook it up for FQP if some one will just go to the trouble to make sure and spot them. Quack DX ...................................................
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-04/msg00053.html (14,744 bytes)

11. Re: [CQ-Contest] Running vs SP (Was Self Spotting) (score: 1)
Author: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@mb.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2004 10:37:16 -0600
Whenever I see someone suggest the big boys always shut out the smaller guys, I'm always reminded of the ways I worked KL7Y (WA2GO op.: QRP winner in 2000 SS) or KG5U (perennial QRP masochist): I cal
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-04/msg00062.html (10,758 bytes)

12. Re: [CQ-Contest] Running vs SP (Was Self Spotting) (score: 1)
Author: Doug Smith W9WI <w9wi@w9wi.com>
Date: 03 Apr 2004 19:19:38 -0600
Indeed, I've had some success in running while QRP in SS. (I've tried it in ARRL DX but with very little success. Not because of any problems with the big guns, it just didn't seem to generate enough
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-04/msg00073.html (9,600 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu