G'day, I'd like to add to the chorus (LZ2CJ, N5IA, K8ND) about the CQ WW 160 that the element of distance should be rewarded and should be a major factor in scoring in its scoring. My suggestion is t
Before doing anything that changes the basic character of the CQ WW 160, there is a much simpler "playing field leveler" that could be adopted. This has been "beat to death" in the past, but I can't
I wonder what is the reason for CQ WW 160m to start when it starts and end when it ends. Why this world-wide event doesn't start, like all major contests, at 00:00 GMT Saturday and ends 2359 GMT Sund
If a contest starts at 22:00z friday and finishes at 16:00z sunday, between January and March there is a world area where two sunsets and two sunrises occur without the need that a full 48 hours pass
G'day Ivo (and other fellow 160m topband contesters), I am not sure why the CQ WW 160 was NOT made either 24 or 48 hours in duration, but the net result of this is a 'playing field' that is far from
Hi All! I'm not sure what is the point of endlessly debating this. NO contest has a completely level playing field and that's why you compete against your peers in your own country/area. Having oper
Steve and group IMHO I believe that the original intent of the timing was to foster what was basically a stateside contest with the times. The start time roughly cooincides with sunset on the East co
Hi Bill, As another op who happens not to live in Region 2, I must add my opinion to Steve's on this one (in spite of adding to the "endless debate"). It's not just a question of being fair in the co
G'day all, Greg ZL3IX hit the nail on the head exactly - my problem (and I think that of others on this reflector) is with the fact that the playing field of the CQ 160 is so far skewed (by its timin