For the 2010 edition of CQ 160 contest, I propose the following changes as followons to the 2009 changes: 1. Make the exchange 59(9) grid where "grid" is 4 character Maidenhead grid square, a-la the
Yes. Yes, but don't scale it -- the Stew Perry scale is quite good! Dump multipliers. That's the major element that gives so great an advantage to those in the most populous areas. Besides -- who lik
So if everyone likes it so much, why aren't there more participants in the Stew Perry contest where these features already exist? _______________________________________________ Topband mailing list
To clarify my suggestions about the CQ 160 test: I think 4 character grid squares are enough, since typical QSO distances on 160 are much greater than typical (but not every) QSO distances on VHF. I
Holiday travel is my reason. I love Stew Perry but the timing is not very convenient for me. I'm pretty likely to be out of town. -Dan _______________________________________________ Topband mailing
All, K1EP wrote (snipped): N5UL says: Throw a 160 CW test with enough participation to keep me awake and I'll come. But--what would these multipliers be? If they are 4-character grid squares, a lot o
In short, "If it Ain't Broke don't try to fix it." The CQ 160 Meter, contest ever since 160 meter pioneer Charles O Brien, W2EQS put the idea together, has consistenly remained very popular and does
The same holds true for VE-W QSOs. They are worth 5 points vs. the 2 point W-W or VE-VE QSOs. There are a disproportionate higher number of W entries than VE entries. Considering that a majority of t
Same here. There is always a family Christmas gathering for me out of town on that weekend. 73, Richard - K5NA _______________________________________________ Topband mailing list Topband@contesting.
How do you rationalize that, Herb? Grid squares would equalize the availability of mults (ignoring the argument that grids are smaller the further you go north/south of the equator) and make the con
It's deja vu all over again (or is everyone just bored?): http://www.contesting.com/survey/64 Posted: Dec 27, 2001 (703 votes, 23 comments) Results: Leave "as is" (abbreviations...SI for Slovenia, ER
How do you rationalize that, Herb? Grid squares would equalize the availability of mults (ignoring the argument that grids are smaller the further you go north/south of the equator) and make the cont
I have operated in all thirteen SPDCs. It continues to grow in popularity because of the certain specific requirements of operating time, the GS exchange, and the distance scoring. At the same time I
hello, such exchnage like in new rules is ok i think and will bring more dynamic into contest. Only what i dont like is the way how stations northen AF northen SA and parts of Midle East gettig "easy
I find myself in agreement with Herb. Some of the suggested "improvements" would make the contest unrecognizable. Just who decided that the CQ 160m contest needed improvement? Dave Heil K8MN ________
Sending your grid square would certainly make getting an accurate exchange during the contest harder. Since any 160M contest is an exercise in weak signal work, most scores would go down. Plus there