[CQ-Contest] Why ARRL SSB Contest is Not My Favorite

George Fremin III geoiii at kkn.net
Wed Mar 6 15:02:55 EST 2013

On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 06:45:08PM -0500, hankkier at aol.com wrote:

>  1 - almost impossible to find a run frequency without stepping on
> someone's toes, except on 10 meters

Yes - true of most large contests (ie. CQ WW DX)

> 2 - poor participation numbers by DX 

But I thought you said the bands were too crowded.

>  3 - reduced # of country multipliers available; probably 25% less
> than available in CQWW

True - the CQ WW has many more folks traveling to many more 
DX locations - and the bands are much more crowded.

> 4 - voicebox can't handle the traffic!

What does this mean?

> 5 - keep working the same stations on the same bands that we have
> worked countless times before

> 6 - BORING

I think what you are really getting at is that there is just not
enough different DX on in the ARRL contests - and that is indeed true
- but I dont think it is boring.

It is just a different mix of things to do.  In the ARRL DX you are
more likely to work DX stations on more bands and since they are only
looking for USA/VE it makes it easier to work them on the low bands
and at odd times of the day and have semi rare DX answer your CQs that
would normally be buried under many DX stations calling CQ.

I am glad the ARRL DX is not another CQ WW DX contest. 

Not all contests have to be the same.

Not all contests have to have as many logs submitted at the CQ WW DX
contests - the differences are the things that keep it interesting.

George Fremin III - K5TR
geoiii at kkn.net

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list