[CQ-Contest] Stewing about QRP

Gilmer, Mike mgilmer at gnlp.com
Mon Dec 20 14:21:33 EST 1999

I think it's silly to equate running QRP with somehow having or being forced
to have a third-tier station.  Don't know why this even entered into this
discussion.  It surely has nothing to do with Bill's original post on the

The fact that it APPEARS to have influenced operators who otherwise would
have run QRO to cut back the juice is Bill's issue.  Yes, it's possible that
any perceived drop in participation could be caused by a number of things
(esp. propagation).  However, it makes sense that many casual ops would give
up because of a lack of readable signals.  If an appreciable number of
usually QRO stations now choose to run QRP strictly because of an
overwhelming multiplier, it would be a bad thing.  I can think of one other
radio event that has a power-based multiplier - and it's not considered "a
contest", hi.

In fact, it seems that the station working the QRPer should be given a
bonus, too, not just the QRPer.  Too bad that requires altering the exchange
(or gasp, sending the dreaded "/QRP").


CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list