[CQ-Contest] Doubts on the WPX Contest

[i4jmy at iol.it]

Brian,

first of all, to move in the most populated band and run (whose tactic 
is also the only available to increase the number of a very generic 
mult like pfxes) is definitely a strategy but also the only possible 
one, and also limited to who has the chance to develop a huge pile up.
Does it have a sense to speak about strategy when only one tactic is 
available ?
Second, the same drift to the few bands take place also when solar flux 
is low and makes higher bands more empty than it could, and should be.
Does have a sense SB, TS (low & HP) and MM when only half of the bands 
have traffic ?

The low band double points it's the evidence the problem I pointed out 
has been noted and a corrective introduced, but same evident the 
correction on points/bands can't cure if the key to open different 
strategyes lay on pfxes that are not band related.
All considered, about 6 of the 11 years in a solar cycle do not give a 
real hope to any real strategy and contribute to messy bands.
Luckily for now, 10m is wide in space and any antenna works.....

73,
Mauri I4JMY




> ---------- Initial message -----------
> 
> From    : "Gina and Brian Maves" <maves at aloha.net>
> To      : "CQ-CONTEST" <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Cc      : "Maurizio Panicara" <i4jmy at iol.it>
> Date    : Sun, 2 Apr 2000 14:20:55 -1000
> Subject : Re: [CQ-Contest] Doubts on the WPX Contest
> 
> Mauri,
> 
> You said:
> "... seemed to me the Y2K ssb WPX has been just a little more than a
> 10-15-20 contest.... 1) wouldn't it be more interesting to introduce
> something that could allow anything like a real strategy be applied ?"
> 
> I respectfully beg to differ with your conclusion.
> 
> You formulate a strategy based on the rules and knowledge of the
> contest--not design a contest that somehow fits your idea of what
> constitutes strategy.  Although many here seem increasingly anxious 
to do
> just that.
> 
> You're exactly right.  WPX is a contest that you can win using a 
strategy
> that never t
r noticing it for the 
first
> time10 years ago, give or take a couple, when KM9P took the U.S. #1 SO
> position only using 10-20.  My reaction was "cool strategy," and 
pretty
> effective I might add.   If you have a station capable of the rates 
required
> for this to work as a strategy, why waste any of your 36 hours on a 
band
> that can't produce rate--even if the Q's are double points.  Mind 
you, I
> haven't been stateside for 6 years, but as I remember, a large 
percentage of
> low band Qs there are stateside to stateside, thus zero points.  
Sure, It
> may hurt your prefix total, but hey, that should be part of the trade-
offs
> you weigh when formulating this strategy.
> 
> Bottom line Mauri, I ask you to rethink your position.  In another 5 
years,
> anyone who doesn't radiate below 14Mhz won't come close to the top 10
> box--unless of course they change their strategy.
> 
> vr,
> Brian
> K9QQ/WH7Z
> 




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