[CQ-Contest] The thread that will not die
jackbrindle at earthlink.net
Tue Nov 22 01:02:04 EST 2005
I fully agree. Well, almost...
At the end of every Sweepstakes, I have the following thoughts:
I am _really_ tired.
Wow, I _really_ enjoyed the contest this year.
I could have done much better.
I can't wait until next year...
Then I start thinking about changes I should make, even though I am
too tired to do anything but sleep right then.
I use all the other contests to prepare for Sweepstakes. I just wish
it wasn't so long until the next one. Being a "little pistol" I do
much better in domestic contests than those for DX. For us, SS is the
ultimate in contesting.
There is one minor (well, could be major) change I would like to make
for pretty much all contests. At present the use of packet spotting
places all stations in the U category. This means that I compete with
the big boys running high power. But I run low power. I would really
like to have a category that is low power, packet assisted. I then
don't have to make the choice of either working in the low power
category or gaining a bit of an advantage by using spotting. I also
wouldn't have to compete with big guns whom i have no chance of
beating. Maybe for next year???
On Nov 21, 2005, at 4:46 PM, Art Boyars wrote:
> W7GG tries again:
> "if u think ss is so much fun try the naqp ....
> it fixes all the things that are annoying in the ss!
> "for example: its 12 hours shorter, u can work stations agn on
> each band, the xhange is shorter, and mults count agn on each
> band .... etc
> "not to detract from the ss format or heritage but it cud be made
> better if the sponsor saw fit .... "
> I vote NO! I like it the way it is (but I am glad that it is no
> longer two weekends). There are NAQPs and other tests for people
> who don't like the challenge of grinding it out. If you go to the
> band-QSOs and band-mults, it'll just make it less fun for the
> little guys (like me). And as for the exchange being "too long" --
> gee whiz! Let there be at least one contest where we have to prove
> that we can communicate. With SCP and automated computer logging
> the WW DX tests hardly require copying ANY info; everybody is busy
> before the test making sure that the dot-cty files have the right
> zone for every ham in the world.
> I wish this idea for "fixing" SS would go away forever. But that's
> an unrealistic hope. So, instead, I'll hope for enough patience to
> politely disagree every time somebody pushes its head above the
> Now I'll go back to trying to figure out how to improve my skills
> and strategy for SS next year.
> (And BTW, I see that most people think that current SO2R practice
> -- including "dueling CQs" -- is acceptable. I was QRT from about
> 1981 to 2000, and I missed those developments. I'll not raise the
> issue again.)
> 73, Art K3KU (that little signal you could not quite copy in SS SSB)
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
- Jack Brindle, W6FB
More information about the CQ-Contest