[CQ-Contest] Zone 8 needs "required features"

[James B. Neiger]

Precisely.  With few exceptions, the places from which All Bands category in
CQ WW is won are West Africa - sometimes North (like CT3 or EA8 or EA9 or
CN8) or South (like ZD8)  or Northern South America (PJ, YV, P4, 9Y, HC8, FY
etc.).  Is it because they make good operators better (best?)?  Of course
not, it's because the CQ WW point system is biased against EVERYONE not in
these choice spots.

Does this really contribute to meaningful results?  Of course not.  The
whole thing is smoke and mirrors, and as I wrote in the NCJ 25 years ago,
REALIZE THIS, and if winning is important, make sure you're in one of the
few chosen spots.  I do.

And if really meaningful results ARE  important to you, either MOVE or QRT.

Will the CQ WW Committee ever change these most unjust rules?  Doubtful.
I'll let the multitude answer as to whether they should.

For me, I'll just keep trucking back to the Equator.  At the point I stop
doing that, I'll join the multitude here trying to (1) figure out who the
best really is (c'mon guys, this ain't TOP GUN SCHOOL), or (2) complain why
the playing field isn't , and never will be, level.


Vy 73


Jim Neiger
N6TJ/ZD8Z

----- Original Message -----
From: Scott Robbins <w4pa at yahoo.com>
To: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2000 10:34 AM
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Zone 8 needs "required features"


>
> I4JMY wrote:
>
> >First of all not everyone would have the same results
> >from EA8 because what makes an operator good is own
> >skill and not the place, althought a
> >place is potentially a winner's place when has the
> >required features
>
> Cheers to that!  And with I4JNY's point on "required
> features" in mind (i.e. 3 point contacts to both EU
> and NA), let's make zone 8 a 3-pointer in the CQ WW
> for inter-North American contacts and then we'll
> REALLY have quite a competition on our hands.
> Don't misconstrue what I'm saying: it's a heck of a
> competition now for the world single op title, but it
> would be even more competitive with this rule change.
>
> Winning a contest is the sum of operator skill,
> equipment, and location.  While equalizing all factors
> is not possible, this is an example of one that is
> long overdue for correction and would make a super
> contest like CQ WW even more competitive than it
> already is.
>
> Scott Robbins, W4PA
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Photos - 35mm Quality Prints, Now Get 15 Free!
> http://photos.yahoo.com/
>
>
> --
> CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
> Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com


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


>From Leigh S. Jones" <kr6x at kr6x.com  Wed Oct  4 21:33:02 2000
From: Leigh S. Jones" <kr6x at kr6x.com (Leigh S. Jones)
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 13:33:02 -0700
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Zone 8 needs "required features"
References: <20001004173403.1574.qmail at web1901.mail.yahoo.com> <015c01c02e30$f9184880$87dbe5c1 at tklimoff>
Message-ID: <076e01c02e42$4ad70a60$ede3c23f at kr6x.org>


Well, we're not likely to be able to equalize the continents.  Listen for
the outcry when I throw in these suggestions:

1) Contacts between different states of the United States (i.e., California
to Massachusetts, etc.), different Canadian provinces, different Japanese
islands, etc., should result in the same number of points as contacts
between two European countries, two different African countries, two
different South American countries (etc.)

2) Contacts between any island nation and the continent with which they are
associated should be 3 point contacts.  Contacts between any island that is
a part of a continental country or US state (etc.) should result in the same
number of points as contacts between two European countries, etc.
Protectorate nations (for example, Puerto Rico) should be considered
separate countries.

I had about 4 more similar changes and clarifications along the same line,
but everyone can see where this is going.  When I get all done listing the
new rules, it looks like a fun contest, a little like the WPX contests.
But, the trouble is, I'm not sure I'd want to give up the present CQWW
contest in order to operate this one.  It would be better to have both.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Timo" <timo.klimoff at kolumbus.fi>
To: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2000 11:28 AM
Subject: Vs: [CQ-Contest] Zone 8 needs "required features"


>
> > Cheers to that!  And with I4JNY's point on "required
> > features" in mind (i.e. 3 point contacts to both EU
> > and NA), let's make zone 8 a 3-pointer in the CQ WW
> > for inter-North American contacts and then we'll
> > REALLY have quite a competition on our hands.
>
> Let's make the equal rules to all the continents. Now rules favor North
Americans (2pts vs. 1pt)...
>
> 73 Timo OH1NOA
>
>
> --
> CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
> Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com
>


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