[CQ-Contest] Is the wpx a prefix test or dx contest?

Wed May 8 23:08:54 EDT 2013

I guess having a civil discussion on contesting is out of the question?

Rick brings up a good point.  It is called the Worked All Prefixes 
Contest not the CQ WW DX TEST.

I also agree with K5ZD on the points he made.  If they took out the 
distance multiplier then USA would work USA all day and night as the 
prefixes are nearly endless and are the contacts.

I thought it was odd that a MS station could put up as many points as a 
full time, fully staffed MM.  It sure does not reward the MM ops with 
the BIG score that they deserved by working 2x the number of prefixes.  
When the multiplier for points per contact  is higher than the 
Multiplier for the purpose of the contest there is an issue.

How to solve it is a completely different animal!  Maybe a distance 
based contact point system Where the guy working EU from Colorado is 
rewarded more than the guy on the East coast?  Just a thought.

Mike W0MU

On 5/8/2013 4:18 PM, Tom Haavisto wrote:
> Lets see what you are REALLY suggesting:
>
> The rules ain't fair, you can't win no matter how hard you try, So
> LETS CHANGE THE RULES!!  YAAYY  I WON!!!
>
> Give us all a break.
>
> I can't win either - does that mean I can lobby for a rule change as well?
>
> Seems to me kids in the lower grades in school have something like
> this already.  They play sports, but they don't keep score.  That way,
> they can run home and tell their parents they won!  Yippeee.  I AIN'T
> A LOOSER!!
>
> Is this really where we need to go?  Don't keep score, and everyone
> can claim a win?  What happens when they get out into the real world,
> and those "no keeping score" rules no longer apply?  Their poor egos'
> get bruised, they pick up their socks, and either try a different
> game, try harder, move on, or whatever.
>
> I really don't wish this to sound as negative as it probably does, but
> life is not perfect, and we don't have a level playing field.
> Changing the rules to help one competitor in one part of one country
> so he can claim a win does not sound very reasonable no matter how
> many ways you try and jusify it..
>
> Don't like the rules?  Create a new contest where you can guarantee
> yourself a win!  That way, you can tilt the table all you like...  No
> more crying how the rules ain't fair.
>
> Tom - VE3CX
>
> P.S.  My appologies in advanace to anyone who may be offended by the
> tone of this post.  Hearing how bad off Rick is just makes me want to
> shake my head and wonder.  I am sure I am not the only one.  I for one
> would LOVE to have all the advantages he has...  I don't.  Life is not
> fair that way.  I enter, do my best, and at the end of the day, if
> things worked well, the stars aligned just the right way - I too might
> win...  We should all be so lucky.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 5/8/13, Rick Dougherty <rick at nq4i.com> wrote:
>> Hi Bill et al....guess I need to make a few additional comments to defend
>> myself...(is that being self serving?)
>>
>> The historical data I study after each contest consists of skimmer reports,
>> signal levels, reverse beacon signal levels and trends, and actual qso
>> data.
>> For many years it is definately apparent that there is signal level
>> differences in Europe on ALL bands when comparing the SE US and the NE
>> US....I would like to go one further why not let the WRTC competition have
>> some stations set up in Ga, and maybe a few in Ohio, and Minnesota and of
>> course a few on the west coast...it is the same country!, So what say?  Any
>> reason why it is not even being considered? It would by the reasons I keep
>> hearing here, be a fair and level competition.
>>
>> I wrote the first email to bring to the attention of all  that the WPX
>> contest does not follow its stated objectives...the objective being working
>> prefixes...the fact that the rules allow different point values is what
>> causes the skewed and biased scoring advantages handed to the NE
>> US....plain and simple...and then there are those who say take it or leave
>> it! Yes it is what it is, but life in full of changes, and we in the
>> contesting community need to continue to evolve and change as necessary.
>>
>> One member of this reflector said I was being self serving...in asking for
>> the 3 point value for each contact, that is not self serving..it would
>> still take a distance based or bonus value to make my score more
>> representative. So in the effort to be self serving, 3 points plus a 50%
>> bonus for every contact is what I really want.
>>
>> Another member of this reflector stated that I simply did not work enough
>> 6 pointers on the low bands...duh!!!! I have known for many of the 50 +
>> years that I have been contesting that on the low bands my station needs to
>> maximize 6 point qso's...you can't work what you cannot hear...unlike a
>> single op who spends a few hours on 80, and some time on 40...my operator
>> team is sitting on the band every hour it is open, cqing, and responding to
>> skimmer spots in hope that a station worth 6 points will call in...my MULT
>> station on 80m has a decent 4 square for transmitting and 880 ft
>> beverages....any NE station with 60 ft high inverted V can clean our
>> clocks...my RUN station on 80m has a 12 element Log Periodic array at 140
>> ft...it has 11.6 dbi gain...and a boom length of 225 ft....and we cannot
>> run EU hardly ever! Historic data from the reverse beacon network shows 6-8
>> db differences between my station and the NE M-M's....there are a number of
>> 2nd and 3rd tier EU stations who do not have enough signal level to make it
>> past the first hop. Those who do make it to the SE US are down in signal
>> level...so there are physically not enough stations who are workable in the
>> first place. The well goes dry very early for the SE US. And don't think I
>> don't know that W0, W8, W5 and W6's don't have the same problems.
>>
>> One of the pre contest briefings with the NQ4I team of op's is to make
>> every effort to get the 6 pointers.... we leave very little on the table,
>> we work every station we can, and we listen extra heard to see if maybe
>> there might be another 6 pointer calling down in the noise...
>>
>> I don't intend to go quietly in the night...I intend to bring the
>> in-equity's as I see them up and discuss them...if you think I am whining,
>> you got
>> another thought coming.
>>
>> de Rick NQ4I
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 7:26 AM, <Cqtestk4xs at aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Never said it was easy from out there, just that it was easier to work
>>> three and six pointers from NE than SE.
>>>
>>> You guys out west get your turns in SS and other domestic contests.
>>>
>>> 73 Bill
>>>
>>>
>>> In a message dated 5/8/2013 10:54:44 A.M. Coordinated Universal Time,
>>> w0mu at w0mu.com writes:
>>>
>>> Try it  from Colorado or anywhere further west.
>>>
>>> Mike W0MU
>>>
>>> On 5/7/2013  2:25 PM, Cqtestk4xs at aol.com wrote:
>>>> I'm not for changing the rules  but.........
>>>>
>>>> If one thinks the difference in  propagation relatively minor you
>>>> haven't
>>>> operated from both  places.  I had a friend come down from W2 land
>>>> years
>>> ago
>>>> and  worked in the WAE CW.  He was listening on 80 and wanted to know
>>> when
>>>> the EU stations got loud.  I told him that was as loud as  they usually
>>> get.
>>>> In the winter K1s can run  EU almost 24 hours a day on 40 for CQWW.
>>>> Try
>>>> that from  here.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not saying we don't have advantages,  but we do NOT have pretty
>>>> much
>>> the
>>>>    same prop as K1  does.
>>>>
>>>> My previous post summed up SE strategy,  work quantity and not
>>>> quality.
>>> It
>>>> worked for me this  year.
>>>>
>>>> Bill K4XS/KH7XS
>>>>
>>>> In a message dated 5/7/2013 8:15:54 P.M. Coordinated Universal  Time,
>>>> xdavid at cis-broadband.com writes:
>>>>
>>>> In  any  case I suspect
>>>> that many of us not living on the east coast  find the  distinction
>>>> between Georgia and Massachusetts to be  relatively  minor
>>>>   _______________________________________________
>>>> CQ-Contest mailing  list
>>>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>>>>   http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CQ-Contest  mailing  list
>>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest