CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] So Sunday Sucked?

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] So Sunday Sucked?
From: "Richard F. DiDonna" <richnn3w@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2017 08:45:34 -0500
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Perhaps we're victims of our own technological success.  As operators, we've gotten so good at doing things like SO2R that we've exhausted the pool of available QSOs earlier in the contest.  A pool that is 30 hours in depth can now effectively be worked down in 22 hours.

Interestingly, that problem does not exist on SSB.  I could go through the published results and find dozens of calls that I didn't work over the course of a weekend.

73 Rich NN3W


On 11/9/2017 7:53 AM, john@kk9a.com wrote:
How many QSOs did the winners have back in the early years of SS?

John KK9A

To:     Reflector <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject:        Re: [CQ-Contest] So Sunday Sucked?
From:   Ward Silver <hwardsil@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 8 Nov 2017 21:19:14 -0600
List-post:      <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>


No.  Next question? :-)

Remember that when Sweeps got started (1930) almost all hams were east of
the Mississippi.  And there was no televised anything. That's probably the
answer - maybe some of the folks who were around HQ in the 50s could fine
tune it for us.  I have inquired of She Who Knows Such Things and will
report my findings.


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>