[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] NAQP Multipliers

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] NAQP Multipliers
From: George Fremin III <geoiii@kkn.net>
Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2005 07:52:30 -0700
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
On Fri, Jun 03, 2005 at 06:26:58PM -0000, W2RU - Bud Hippisley wrote:
> K8CC wrote: 
> > For NAQP (which was intended to replace 
> > the ARRL Open CD Party)....When it came to the USA, the obvious multiplier
> was "states".
> Why were States the "obvious" multiplier when the long-stated intent was to
> replace a very popular contest that used ARRL Sections as multipliers?

I will make a guess.

 - The NAQP is not an ARRL contest so using ARRL sections
   seems slightly out of place.

 - An effort to make the exchange as simple and as 
   user (or maybe newbie) friendly as possible.

The fact is that I work more casual non-contest guys in 
the NAQP than in many or most other contests. 

What could be more natural and easy than exchanging 
your Name and your State.  It does wonders for getting
the non-contester QSOS.  

In contrast the SS exchange (and I dearly love it) is not
very newbie friendly.  In fact - this is a true story.

In the fall of 1978 a friend and I were getting a station
setup so we could do the ARRL 160 and 10 meter contests
from a family farm.  We had built a 3 ele 10 meter yagi
and put it up as well as stringing out a long wire for 
160 meters.  We borrowed a radio from our 160 contest elmer
and we just happened to be out the Saturday of the phone 
SS.  WE dialed around the bands and kind of looked at eachother
and said... a contest... cool.  But what are all those leters
and number and such?  We did not have a QST handy and 
I dont think we made a single QSO.  We would have understood
59 state or name and state. 

> would have created a more interesting contest if they had selected ARRL
> Sections instead of States for the USA multipliers.  I believe all current
> entrants and most potential NA entrants are fully conversant with the
> concept of ARRL Sections -- either through the pages of QST, through local
> SM elections, or through prior SS participation -- so I don't think use of
> Sections harms the "simplicity" objective at all. 

I will disagree - having talked many stations through the exchange
only to get to the section part and have the guy have zero clue.  The
only option is to read through a list of some of the sections in his
area of the state. 

I like the fact that some contests use states and some use
sections and some use zones and some use grid squares.  

If all of the contests had the same structure and rules
I would find them less interesting.

George Fremin III - K5TR

CQ-Contest mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>