Hi,
I dont' understand why we need to have 2 different rules in same category
for contests organized by same sponsors (CQ).
It creates confusion in operators, creates a different set-up for same
category (with necessary hardware and time and money to prepare it),
creates less "fun" in team-work.
CQWW DX still remains "THE CONTEST" for the caractheristics of its valid
mults and qso score, WPX will have his own identity by its mults and serial
numbers.
But all should be much easier to be managed both sides, players and contest
commitee.
This kind of operation is already been applyed to CQ160 changing the report
system from "Country" to "CQ Zone" and it works out!
Best 73's
Luca IK2NCJ (D4C)
2013/4/12 Davor Kucelin <davor.kucelin@plavalaguna.hr>
> Randy,
>
> The way the rule is now means for top scorers 3 transmitters with one
> transmited signal at time:
> For example RUN station, Inband S&P station, Mult station that is limited
> to
> few qsos per hour.
> All 3 stations are interlocked and only one TX signal at time.
>
> In CQ WW there is separated mult station that is not interlocked with run
> limited 10min per band.
>
> In CQ WPX would be nice to have 10min rule for mults on other bands but the
> mult TX must be interlocked
> with RUN station.
>
> In M/S you can have guys chasing DX(Mults) as some people dont like to RUN
> while in M/2 you have to RUN all
> the time with 2 radios + chaising mults.
>
> M/2 topscorers nowdays use: RUN1/ RUN2 + Inband / interlocked MULTS station
> for each RUN position
> limited by bandchanges. Which means at least 4 operating positions
>
> 73 Dave 9A1UN
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|