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

[john at kk9a.com]

If you want to compare apples to apples, WX3B had 22,384,128 pts and NQ4I 
had 22,326,304 pts.  The U.S. M/M category was a very close race and you 
could have won with a few more more high band QSOs.  I do not think that 80m 
is a big factor in WPX. Conditions were poor in the 2013 WPX phone contest 
however there was a lot of U.S. activity, at least on 20m where I operated 
and made a record number of QSOs. You are comparing your score to K1LZ whose 
operators did a phenomenal job in this contest.  Other well staffed super 
stations in New England such as WW1WW did not come close to Krassy's score.

John KK9A


To:Jeff Clarke <ku8e at bellsouth.net>
Subject:Re: [CQ-Contest] Is the wpx a prefix test or dx contest?
From:Rick Dougherty <rick at nq4i.com>
Date:Sat, 11 May 2013 05:38:29 -0400

To say it is an apples to orange comparison, is to say you do not
comprehend what the topic of conversation has been.

When a fully staffed M-M team has to make 2400 additional qso's to make the
same score as a M-S team that is not any band full time, is
what I am talking about. The WPX contest has the geographical advantage
because of the low band point system that awards a huge advantage
to any New England station.

Yes it is true that the NQ4I team has won a number of previous
WPXcontests.....but with that in mind, there was no legit competition
from New
England. Had KC1XX operated in this contest, he would, on a bad day make
30% more qso's than NQ4I and on a good day 80-100% more qsos. These
qsoscoming from two areas...the low bands and the high bands where he
has a
tremendous advantage to hear and work stations that will never be heard or
worked at the next propagation hop.

My proposal for the point scoring of 3 points per qso regardless makes the
contest truer to its stated objective and removes the geographical
advantage. For any M-M there are only so many finite contacts possible.
KU8E would have us believe that there is a wealth of stateside stations
that could be worked thus creating a super inflated score for the NQ4I
team. Not true. The qsos  made would not improve, because
there are not additional qso's to be made. The well is already dry.

So we are back to the low band point system that awards more points for
stations that have geographical nearness and penalizes those that do not.

Suffice it to say, K1LZ and his team are not dumb....they know that to make
a winning score they need to make as many 6 point qso's as possible...the
NQ4I team likewise knows the point breakdown and the need for 6 point
qso's....K1LZ
spends only a few hours on 80m...NQ4I has
2 full time ops and maintains a strong presence on the band both cq'ing and
S & P'ing and cannot begin to work as many qso's as the brief foray on the
band of K1LZ.

To carry the score extrapolation a little further out. in this example, it
takes the NQ4I team 2400 qso's to equal K1LZ's score...had KC1XX been on,
the score differential would be an additional 3000 qso's deficit for the
NQ4I team to over come. In other words for the NQ4I team to equal the
score differential from a KC1XX competitor, some thing around 5400
qsoswould make the scores comparable, nearly twice as many
qso's.

If we consider KC1XX makes the exact number of qso's as NQ4I ( and we
assume he maintains 3.17 qso points ratio as K1LZ) we have:

7077 qso's 1450 prefixes = 32.6 million points

applying 3 points per qso we have

7077 qso's 1450 prefixes = 30.7 Mil

The scores are equal because  the same number of qso's were made, and to
clinch the win, one of the two teams needs to work another prefix, not
another low band contact where advantage exists now.

KU8e would have us believe that NQ4I is hoarding stateside qso's and if the
rules change to 3 points per contact, then NQ4I will have a tremendous
advantage. I say make the contest true to it's stated objective....a prefix
contest...plain and simple. The winner is determined by who works the most
qso's and prefixes...not who has the best geographical advantage with an
outdated and biased point system.

de NQ4I