[CQ-Contest] Improving the Fabulous CQ 160 Contest

[Tom Haavisto]

I think you are missing the point, so lets see if I can clarify.

Typically in a contest, I will be calling CQ.  Maybe I sound "needy" -
whatever works I guess, but I manage to get a number of folks to call
me.  "I am not in the contest.  I want to give you some points - what
information do you need?"  Name, state - SIMPLE stuff.  Asking the
person to go on the internet to QRZ.COM, HAMCALL.NET, whatever to look
themselves up, figure out what grid they are in is a non-starter.  I
know the answer I would give if the roles were reversed - "Why don't
YOU go to the website, and get the information yourself?"  I typically
run unassisted, so this is not going to work well....

Consider the same scenario on CW - I will give out ON, and if they
hear the folks I am working, they will hear GA, FL, NY, whatever, they
can make a pretty good guess that he needs to send his state.  If they
hear five or nine digits go whizzing by, do you really expect them to
figure out "OK - they are looking for zip codes...."  What about folks
outside the US?

I guess I am also wondering - why are some folks trying to hijack an
already popular contest, and change how it works?  If there is that
much interest in having a contest (other than the SP) where grids are
exchanged, then by all means - have at it.  Makes the rules, pick a
weekend, and start publicizing it.  It will take a lot of work, and if
the rules are good, you may manage to get a contest folks are
interested in.

I love the SP - its great, but I am sure most of us here realize you
will NOT be making QSO's with a person who just got on, and wants to
give out a few points to help out his fellow hams.  You DO see this in
the CQ and the ARRL contests.  Its also a chance to work some DX.  I
expect in part this accounts for more entries, and more unique
callsigns appearing in the logs of folks who do send logs in.


Tom - VE3CX


On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 8:11 AM, Julius Fazekas <phriendly1 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> If someone in the US doesn't know their grid, couldn't they just send there Zip Code?
>
> Julius Fazekas
> N2WN

>
>> From: Jimk8mr at aol.com <Jimk8mr at aol.com>
>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Improving the Fabulous CQ 160 Contest
>> To: tod at k0to.us, cq-contest at contesting.com
>> Date: Wednesday, January 7, 2009, 4:59 PM
>> I enjoy the Stew Perry in part because of the grid square
>> exchange.  I  like
>> to dream that I am working all those cool grids on six
>> meters, even though
>> it's really on 160.
>>
>> Tod is onto a good idea of a default "I don't know
>> my grid" entry, but I
>> think it should be put in the log by the serious guy.  If a
>> little guy  knows
>> from the rules to send "AA11", he very likely to
>> know, or to learn, what  his
>> grid square is.
>>
>> Especially on SSB, there would be a lot of "what's
>> your  QTH?" probing to get
>> a proper grid square from an unknowing  person. (After all,
>> he could be a new
>> mult.)  If all failed, then "AA11"  could be
>> entered as an "I worked this
>> guy, but he was clueless" entry.  If  a lazy big gun
>> logged a weak guy as "AA11"
>> and the guy sent in a log showing  otherwise, then the big
>> gun would lose the
>> qso, maybe with a modest  penalty.
>>
>> The meaningless RST could be dropped to keep the exchange
>> to two items -  the
>> Grid Square and S/P/or CQ Zone.  K8MR sends  EN91 OH;
>> PJ2T sends FK62 09.
>>
>> It would be further cool to have the CQ computers score the
>> contest in
>> several ways.  The traditional way; a Stew Perry pure
>> distance way; a  combination
>> of the two, with multipliers (whatever they might be) and
>> qso points
>> determined by distance. So there might be several winners,
>> or maybe even the  same guy
>> winning under all scoring systems.
>>
>> Lots of interesting ways to do this, if the Not Invented
>> Here syndrome of
>> other CQ contests can be avoided.
>>
>>
>> 73  -  Jim   K8MR
>>
>>
>>
>> In a message dated 1/7/2009 4:32:24 P.M. Eastern Standard
>> Time, tod at k0to.us
>> writes:
>>
>> It has  been said that "plagiarism is the sincerest
>> form of flattery".
>>
>> I am in  agreement with the thought that it would not be
>> appropriate to
>> "imitate"  the Stew Perry Contest. However, it
>> might be appropriate to
>> incorporate a  key feature of that contest -- the grid
>> square as a part of
>> the exchange --  in a revised CQ 160 Contest.