CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WPX rules, it finally happened

To: Ward Silver <hwardsil@gmail.com>, "cq-contest@contesting.com" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WPX rules, it finally happened
From: Bob Kupps <n6bk@yahoo.com>
Reply-to: Bob Kupps <n6bk@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 17:53:34 -0800 (PST)
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Well said.



On Saturday, February 1, 2014 8:36 AM, Ward Silver <hwardsil@gmail.com> wrote:
 
Thank you to K0RC and W9WI for getting it right.  Contesting - and 
amateur radio generally - exists to make contacts and exchange between 
stations.  Cooperation is required - it is not optional. Not sending 
one's call sign frequently defeats the cooperation and consumes the 
limited contest time of other stations listening without providing any 
benefit to them.  That pretty much defines poor sportsmanship in my book.

I don't care how incredibly self-important the running station thinks 
they must be that we all have to "wait or go away," it violates the 
implicit bargain between stations to cooperate as effectively as 
possible so that both maximize their score.

At PJ4Q this past CQ WW CW we gave our call sign after EVERY SINGLE QSO 
and placed in the world M2 Top Ten with a handful of small beams and 
verticals so it didn't hurt us one bit.  Every time we sent the call it 
acted like a short CQ and kept the pileups in sync. No other station had 
to throw away their contest minutes to wait for our call sign and our 
dupe rate was correspondingly low in return - that's called cooperation.

73, Ward N0AX
_______________________________________________
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

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