[CQ-Contest] ARRL DX Contest changes SANITY CHECK!

Pete Smith n4zr at contesting.com
Wed Sep 1 15:39:06 EDT 1999

At 06:08 PM 8/31/1999 -0400, Jimmy Weierich wrote:
>I received the message that follows my comments from Bill Kennamer 
>and post it here with his permission.
>IMHO, if accurate and thorough log checking is a good thing for 
>contesting and a portion of the exchange makes that checking 
>difficult, something IS broken.
>If the exchange can be changed without altering the essential nature 
>of the contest and without invalidating comparisons to the existing 
>records it seems to me that it should be done.
>Using ITU zone in the DX exchange would accomplish that. ITU zone 
>would not significantly impact the length or complexity of the 
>exchange and hence keep comparisons to previous records valid. 
>And,most contest participants are already familiar with ITU zone from 
>the IARU contest.
>The key to making any change to the exchange work will be getting the 
>word out, world wide, sufficiently before the contest so that all 
>participants are prepared for the change.

In my opinion, this would eliminate any challenge in the exchange, making
it essentially like CQWW but without the geographic diversity.  I don't see
why a test like Tree's "instability quotient" couldn't be used to give a
pretty good idea of whether the problems are US operator error or DX
station mind-changing, or ... 

By the way, aren't there still some countries that have different power
limits for different bands?  I seem to recall that being an issue with JA's.

73,  Pete N4ZR
Sometimes a tower is just a tower

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