Bob, KQ2M wrote:
>Someone on this reflector recently said (I am paraphrasing) there was an
>absurd ratio of mult's to qso's and that one merely needed push the F1
>button to get all the mults. This reflects a lack of knowledge of how
>the winners of these contests actually operate.
WPX definitely has the highest ratio of mults to QSO and there is not much
point in S & P. Recent sweep of almost dead 15m band on Sunday evening
in ARRL SSB from II3T brought me few strong USA stations including N2RM!
I guess they pushed F1 all the time as we did with a decent 300W :-)
>First of all, to my knowledge, NO ONE has won a CQWW, ARRL DX or WPX
>contest since 1987 WITHOUT using two radios EFFECTIVELY!
I guess PC, master data bases, packet radio and Internet had significantly
higher impact on contesting scene than 2 radios! However, radiated RF can
be only increased that way and additional mults come handy. Nice example
is in W2GD versus CT1BOH Aruba story...
>Those who only push F1, do NOT win.
Incidentally, CQ was assigned to F10 in my contest program ever since 1984!
>Besides it is awfully egocentric to think that the WPX contests should be
>tailored for the US.
It is not, if one only holds USA license but lives abroad :-) We all respect
the number of USA contest participants and their discipline second only to JA.
Being bigger than EU, I feel intra-USA QSO should bring them points...
>As it stands, WPX participation in the US is miniscule compared to EU,
>JA and other areas of the world. Surely they should have more input?
WPX gives EU better chance of achieving high scores than any other major
>If I had a 30 hour time limit for CQWW would I have heard and worked JH5ZJS
>and a VS97 on 10 meter LP at 14z? Would they even have been on 10 meters?
>I don't think so! We would have missed a fascinating and exciting band
This is the main problem with WPX! You do NOT need LP or any other strange
propagations as you may simply add DL2 & DL3 for the same mults count. Just
stay on 40m and 20m and run, run, run...
>1) We change the scoring system so that US works US for 1 pt like EU
>Same continent qso's count 2 points and outside the continent count 3.
>This will bring up the level of US scores to be more competitive with
>the rest of the world and will help the midwest and west coast
>"catch-up" with the NE.
I do support this proposal but many non-USA winners will be afected!
>2) We establish Low Power categories and awards
WPX is already very creative at generating new categories!
>3) We move WPXCW to the last weekend in April for better propagation
>with less low-band noise (and get it away from Memorial Day Weekend!)
Great but move it also from my birthday on March 27th :-)
>4) We adopt a point system similar to WAE so that 40 is 2x points, 80
> is 3x points and 160 is 4x points.
This is the only way to really activate lower bands!
>5) We allow Single op's to operate with NO time limit just like M/S
> and M/M.
I am for it at the very young contesters age of 53!
>6) I like the grid square point idea also but think that #1 & 4 are much
>easier to implement and overall more effective in encouraging 6 band
>participation, and 6 band participation is what we are currently
Somehow it does not catch up on HF but serial numbers are fine feedback.
>Many years ago WAE switched from a 36 of 48 hour format to a 24 of 30.
>What a disaster!
Even bigger disaster was the period when USA states counted as mults!
>trying to work EU in August on 80 is pure HELL!
It certainly is but that distinguishes men from the boys! It's not WPX...
>Finally, to the station (who shall remain nameless) who said there is
>minimal strategy as far as band changing and point scoring goes, PLEASE
>come to the Northeast and operate the BIGGEST station possible so you
>won't have any excuses when I beat the pants off of you!
Lot of us did come to WRTC-96 and lost our pants :-) But we concluded it
was home ground advantage! Dayton pile-up tapes are a different story...
>11 years ago in ARRL CW I became the first operator to use two radios in
>EVERY DX contest.
I got a feeling that it somehow relates to the length of Bob's contribution!
>I remember the furor that I created.
I was warned that my CW time multiplexed mode of operation at two freqs
is OK unless I win something...
>So what is the next area of score advancement? Why it's not using two radios,
>but using two radios EFFECTIVELY!
Humans are not very effective even during 30 hours period on such a simple
tasks like single tone sequencial decoding or speech understanding.
Computers can do that better but as Brian, K6STI said:
I wouldn't like robot doing sex for me :-)
73 de Mario, S56A, N1YU.
P.S. I was prompted to this comment by the exceptionally short note from my
favored contest and hamradio writer and distinguished pile-up handler K3ZO.
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com