I think there is a desire to eliminate intracountry QSO parties - as in what
we see in the IARU contest where large stations make literally hundreds of
unique QSOs - all with in-country stations.
Now where you might see a little movement is with the relative term of the
word "DX". DX to most people means distance. That definition has become
inextricably tied to ARRL DXCC entity.
In parallel with arguments that we've seen in the past is this problem -
related to the Zero point question.
If I am a ON4 station in Brussels and work a PA3 station in Amsterdam (no
more than 150 miles away), I get one point. If I am a VE7 station in Quebec
City and work a VE7 station in Vancouver (about 2300 miles away), I get zero
points. Distancewise, and traditional DX wise, I've worked a lot harder in
the Canadian example.
Part of the remedy might be to award one QSO point to stations where a QSO
is made with a station in the same country, but in a different zone. There
will be certainly examples where QSOs from one zone to another are no more
than the distance given in the ON-PA example, but these are more exceptional
than the number of zone 3 to 5 QSOs or zone 3 to zone 2 QSOs or zone 18 to
zone 19 QSOs.
73 Rich NN3W
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ted Bryant" <w4nz@comcast.net>
To: <CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2007 9:53 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW and 0 pointers
>
> Regarding ZERO point QSO's:
>
> I always thought it a little odd that in a major, world-wide contest where
> scores seem to matter
> very much, a perfectly legitimate QSO between two stations could result in
> no QSO points scored for
> either, an advantage for one and time lost for the other who is basically
> honor-bound by
> sportsmanship to make the QSO. Yet, some say that there is no problem in
> this. How is there NOT a
> problem here?
>
> Ted W4NZ
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com]On Behalf Of Rick Dougherty
> NQ4I
> Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2007 7:00 PM
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com; Bill Tippett
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW and 0 pointers
>
>
> Hi Bill...I have the greatest respect for your accomplishments in
> contesting
> over the years, BUT
> saying it ain't gonna happen is far from right....there are inadequacies
> in
> the contest as we participate in it, and things just might change...the
> squeaky wheel gets the grease....and I for one will continue to squawk
> about
> the in-adequacies as I see them...it keeps coming up, because it isn't
> right...plain and simple! If more stations had to put up with this
> in-adequacy it would get more response....it doesn't affect the m-m's in
> the
> NE as much as the SE, and therefore must not be a problem!
>
> de Rick nq4i
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bill Tippett" <btippett@alum.mit.edu>
> To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2007 5:23 PM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW and 0 pointers
>
>
>>
>>
>> VO1HE:
>> >No real easy solution to this.
>>
>> I disagree. The easy solution is to work
>> serious competitors who long ago learned to log
>> every QSO. If you work Joe Blow who is looking
>> for new band countries, chances are that he may
>> not log you. Until my first UBN experience, I
>> was one of those who did not log every USA guy
>> who called. After I got my first UBN report and
>> realized I was unknowingly penalizing some who
>> I had not logged, I then started logging every call.
>>
>> NQ4I:
>> >I have been a strong advocate of 1 point for
>> one's own country
>>
>> Oh no! PLEASE not this again. Ain'tgonna happen and I
>> don't understand why
>> it keeps coming up. This would totally
>> change the character of CQ WW and destroy
>> 50 years worth of history and records in
>> the process.
>>
>> 73, Bill W4ZV
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
|