The challenge here is that you are using a single use case to illustrate a
very wide multi-variable "problem" that has global impact. It is not enough
to compare GA to MA, you also need to look at how the rule change would
impact other parts of the world. If all QSOs were the same value, would
there be any incentive for Europeans to work outside of Europe? Same here
in the USA?
Scoring on continental boundaries is always going to create some hot spots.
North Africa and northern South America to name two. Any scoring proposal
needs to account for those as well.
Randy, K5ZD
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> Rick Dougherty
> Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2013 4:58 PM
> To: Bill K4XS
> Cc: CQ Contest
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Is the wpx a prefix test or dx contest?
>
> Hi Bill et al....guess I need to make a few additional comments to defend
> myself...(is that being self serving?)
>
> The historical data I study after each contest consists of skimmer
> reports, signal levels, reverse beacon signal levels and trends, and
> actual qso data.
> For many years it is definately apparent that there is signal level
> differences in Europe on ALL bands when comparing the SE US and the NE
> US....I would like to go one further why not let the WRTC competition
> have some stations set up in Ga, and maybe a few in Ohio, and Minnesota
> and of course a few on the west coast...it is the same country!, So what
> say? Any reason why it is not even being considered? It would by the
> reasons I keep hearing here, be a fair and level competition.
>
> I wrote the first email to bring to the attention of all that the WPX
> contest does not follow its stated objectives...the objective being
> working prefixes...the fact that the rules allow different point values
> is what causes the skewed and biased scoring advantages handed to the NE
> US....plain and simple...and then there are those who say take it or
> leave it! Yes it is what it is, but life in full of changes, and we in
> the contesting community need to continue to evolve and change as
> necessary.
>
> One member of this reflector said I was being self serving...in asking
> for the 3 point value for each contact, that is not self serving..it
> would still take a distance based or bonus value to make my score more
> representative. So in the effort to be self serving, 3 points plus a 50%
> bonus for every contact is what I really want.
>
> Another member of this reflector stated that I simply did not work enough
> 6 pointers on the low bands...duh!!!! I have known for many of the 50 +
> years that I have been contesting that on the low bands my station needs
> to maximize 6 point qso's...you can't work what you cannot hear...unlike
> a single op who spends a few hours on 80, and some time on 40...my
> operator team is sitting on the band every hour it is open, cqing, and
> responding to skimmer spots in hope that a station worth 6 points will
> call in...my MULT station on 80m has a decent 4 square for transmitting
> and 880 ft beverages....any NE station with 60 ft high inverted V can
> clean our clocks...my RUN station on 80m has a 12 element Log Periodic
> array at 140 ft...it has 11.6 dbi gain...and a boom length of 225
> ft....and we cannot run EU hardly ever! Historic data from the reverse
> beacon network shows 6-8 db differences between my station and the NE M-
> M's....there are a number of 2nd and 3rd tier EU stations who do not have
> enough signal level to make it past the first hop. Those who do make it
> to the SE US are down in signal level...so there are physically not
> enough stations who are workable in the first place. The well goes dry
> very early for the SE US. And don't think I don't know that W0, W8, W5
> and W6's don't have the same problems.
>
> One of the pre contest briefings with the NQ4I team of op's is to make
> every effort to get the 6 pointers.... we leave very little on the table,
> we work every station we can, and we listen extra heard to see if maybe
> there might be another 6 pointer calling down in the noise...
>
> I don't intend to go quietly in the night...I intend to bring the in-
> equity's as I see them up and discuss them...if you think I am whining,
> you got another thought coming.
>
> de Rick NQ4I
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 7:26 AM, <Cqtestk4xs@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > Never said it was easy from out there, just that it was easier to work
> > three and six pointers from NE than SE.
> >
> > You guys out west get your turns in SS and other domestic contests.
> >
> > 73 Bill
> >
> >
> > In a message dated 5/8/2013 10:54:44 A.M. Coordinated Universal Time,
> > w0mu@w0mu.com writes:
> >
> > Try it from Colorado or anywhere further west.
> >
> > Mike W0MU
> >
> > On 5/7/2013 2:25 PM, Cqtestk4xs@aol.com wrote:
> > > I'm not for changing the rules but.........
> > >
> > > If one thinks the difference in propagation relatively minor you
> > > haven't operated from both places. I had a friend come down from
> > > W2 land years
> > ago
> > > and worked in the WAE CW. He was listening on 80 and wanted to
> > > know
> > when
> > > the EU stations got loud. I told him that was as loud as they
> > > usually
> > get.
> > >
> > > In the winter K1s can run EU almost 24 hours a day on 40 for CQWW.
> Try
> > > that from here.
> > >
> > > I'm not saying we don't have advantages, but we do NOT have pretty
> > > much
> > the
> > > same prop as K1 does.
> > >
> > > My previous post summed up SE strategy, work quantity and not
> quality.
> > It
> > > worked for me this year.
> > >
> > > Bill K4XS/KH7XS
> > >
> > > In a message dated 5/7/2013 8:15:54 P.M. Coordinated Universal
> > > Time, xdavid@cis-broadband.com writes:
> > >
> > > In any case I suspect
> > > that many of us not living on the east coast find the distinction
> > > between Georgia and Massachusetts to be relatively minor
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|