[CQ-Contest] Let's change the ARRLDX rules

[W0uo@cs.com]

Bob's suggestion below is excellent and, in my opinion, is exactly what the ARRL rules call for.  Amazing!! His suggestion points out that the real problem is reporting the results in ways not recognized by the rules of the contest.

Other respondents have indicated that other contests have natural advantages that are different from the ARRL DX Test and, accordingly, suffer from the same skewed reporting.  The solution is the same.

Jim
W0UO/5

Jim
W0UO/5

"k6xx at juno.com" <k6xx at juno.com> wrote:

>
>Indeed, it has been interesting to read the different viewpoints.
>
>Now, I'll present THE SOLUTION to this problem. It came to me on Monday morning, 21 February, while perusing the ARRL DX scores on 3830. It was the result of realizing that I had been soundly trounced by many stations, including _low power_ entrants, several of whom also got more sleep than I. 
>
>The solution: eliminate all national (US/VE) awards. Recognize the winners in each ARRL Division and Section (including second, third, etc., places as appropriate). Do not emphasize the top national score, since it is only relevant regionally. (This does not mean eliminating national awards for DX, of course).
>
>Think of it: those poor W1s need no longer suffer ignominious defeat at the hands of those horrid (fill in the blank: VY2s?). The highest scoring W1 gets the same certificate as the top VY2. Problem solved.
>
>Bonus: us "third rate lids west of 90 degrees W longitude" likewise will now compete against similarly handicapped operators, with the regional high scorer receiving appropriate recognition. The increasingly unequal geographic/demographic effect is thus normalized. Elegantly simple!
>
>Why hasn't this already been implemented? I'm "absolutely certain" this has nothing to do with the headquarters location of the ARRL (and CQ Mag?) in the Northeast corner of the US. Perish the thought. 
>
>Likewise, I'm "absolutely certain" that the noticeable decrease in ARRL DX enthusiasm from W6/W7 that I've observed over the past decade is simply an aberration, and not a byproduct of the drastically reduced effort/result ratio. I won't complain that there are far fewer casual local operators, and those that do get on, do so for fewer minutes; after all, this gives me more bandwidth to call those low-rate CQs toward the Pacific/East Asia. Well, after changing propagation forces the east coast to run Eu on another band, anyway. 
>
>ARRL DX (once my favorite contest)... change the format? No! Change its reporting and emphasize regional effort! 
>
>(My apologies to non-English speakers struggling to decipher my sarcasm)
>
>73 de Bob, K6XX
>www.k6xx.com 
>
>
>-- "Robert Shohet" <kq2m at earthlink.net> wrote:
>It has been interesting to read the different viewpoints in this discussion.
>
>[cut]
>
>___________________________________________________________________
>Speed up your surfing with Juno SpeedBand.
>Now includes pop-up blocker!
>Only $14.95/month -visit http://www.juno.com/surf to sign up today!
>
>_______________________________________________
>CQ-Contest mailing list
>CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>