[CQ-Contest] a little more fairness?
Jimk8mr at aol.com
Jimk8mr at aol.com
Thu Dec 9 18:36:32 PST 2010
Propagation is indeed interesting from that part of the world (actually it
is interesting from low latitude locations anywhere in the world), but
interesting propagation won't win contests on its own. Being seven time zones
from the two major activity centers is a big hurdle.
The 1/2/3 point structure in CQWW leaves a lot to be desired. One point
qsos make sense in EU where lots of close activity, for both QSOs and
available mutlipliers, balances out the one pointness. For the rest of the world
that is not the case. Two point qsos within continents, excepting Europe,
would indeed make sense.
But better yet, consider that with computer scoring, there is no real need
for integer values for qso points. Why not 1.3 or 2.9 point qsos? I'd
suggest that point values based on zone to zone distances of between one point
(same zone) and three points (the antipodes) would go a long way to giving
places like zones 22, 25, or 28 a reasonable chance, at least at good times
of the solar cycle. It would also get rid of the ridiculous advantages of
places like northern Africa and northern South America.
Such scoring would not have to replace the present "Classic" version of
CQWW scoring. A parallel "Contest Within a Contest" would work great for this
Such changes will never come from the CQ Committee, but if checked logs
could be made available to a suitable outside group, such a distance
equalized scoring system could give the recognition deserved by ops in the far
reaches of the globe.
73 - Jim K8MR
In a message dated 12/9/2010 4:11:17 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
vs_otw at rogers.com writes:
Sorry, just could not resist not to interfere and share my own experience.
Having operated from Europe and N. America, I was truly amazed how the
propagation looks like in the Zone 24, particularily I mean Shanghai,
located at a close proximity to the zones 22, 26, 27 28 discussed here. I
did not operate from there because it took some time to get the Chinese
foreign operator's license. Finally I got the ticket but my stay in China
turn to be over then. Anyway, I had a small receiver with the "SSB
so that I could SWL a bit.
I watched CQ WW SSB and 2009, as well as some other contests and just
My observations were amazing.
- While there is not a beep on 15m at my QTH in Canada, both 15 and 10 m
- 40-20-15 m are perfectly open to Europe, the Far East and West Coast NA
for several hours. 40 m is open virtually 24/7. 10 m was fine for the Far
East/Japan, Pacific and West Coast.
- Pacific stations are there with almost equal signals on any bands, 10 to
80 m. A KH2 was a perfect example (59+++ 10 through 80 m) in the CQ WW.
- ZM4A (I think, that was the call) was there like a beacon everywhere 40
and up being the strongest on most of bands, though not as strong on 80.
- I could watch a XX9 station running JA's on 10 m for hours and days
non-stop. It even made me curious whether the commonly-accepted idea that
the JA guys disappear by end of contests because they have to go to work
just a myth.
Sorry, gents, but I am completely sure that even a modest station in the
area can easily provide a blilliant result without any change is the
existing points' system.
> --- On Mon, 6/12/10, Charles Harpole <k4vud at hotmail.com> wrote:
> From: Charles Harpole <k4vud at hotmail.com>
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] a little more fairness?
> To: "Contest Internet" <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Received: Monday, 6 December, 2010, 10:34 PM
> A modest proposal.... Could the contesting community consider cutting
> some slack to a neglected part of the contesting world, specifically CQ
> Zones 22, 26, 27 and 28, South Asia area. I suggest doubling the point
> count for working stations in this area from outside the zones.
> The reason is that (1) most beams are from NA to EU or the reverse or
> on JA (these headings are a long way from S. Asia usually), (2) many
> high power stations clustered in EU tend to drown out S. Asia to all in
> EU, (3) the start time of 0000Z gives very poor first hours to S. Asia
> stations due to prop at those hours, and (5) there are just not as many
> one-hop stations to work within these and near-by zones and (5) not many
> stations in S. Asia do contests partly due to what is listed here.
> The playing field is just not flat, not nearly, and looks more like a
> mountain between S. Asia and the large collections of contesters in EU
> NA. So, I ask this be considered because it will also liven up contests
> and add more challenges. I will certainly encourage S. Asia stations to
> participate more and longer.
> 73, Thanks, HS0ZCW
> Charles Harpole
> k4vud at hotmail.com
More information about the CQ-Contest