JIM NEIGER n6tj at sbcglobal.net
Wed Apr 9 21:27:39 EDT 2014

On this subject, some of us spun it around in the early 1980's, and I guess 
there were many arguments opposed to ANY "change", one of the often stated: 
"it will invalidate all the records".  Most of which since have subsequently 
become "invalidated" - upwards.....

And today, if you're not in West Africa or "northern" South America, with a 
few exceptions like when N6KT, W2SC, or N5TJ are operating, you're not going 
to win SO/AB.

In 1983, for CQ WW, I had proposed a notion based on Zones, but it was so 
complicated, I fear I can't even remember what it was.  I only remember 
someone saying that Zone 20 EU would have a big advantage over Zone 14/15 

For me, today, I think the CQ WW Committee should take a one year Beta Test 

           (1) In your country, ZERO points

           (2) Everyone else, THREE points

I predict we would get even more expeditions to interesting and now 
suddenly, competitive multipliers.

Will it level the playing field?  Nope.  That simply will never happen. 
Will it become a European Sweepstakes??  Maybe, but it sure will be fun to 
listen to the BIG, BROAD signals all trying to run one another :)

As it's a Beta Test, the scores don't apply to existing records.  What would 
we have to lose to give it a one year try??  Today's "younger" generations 
are oft raving about "change".  Here you go, guys.

Along a related subject, at the contest start, I believe that each operator 
should get automatic credit for their Zone and Country.  Like the BINGO FREE 
square at the center.  (I cannot begin to share the stories of the steps 
over the years I had to take to make sure I could work another ZD8 for a 
double mult that I would certainly miss ...... like lending a radio, 
programming a keyer, etc.  Great fun).  It's often frustrating to fly ten 
thousand miles, give your double mult to thousands,  but then miss Zone 34 
because you were the only SU on in CQ WW.

Just some rambling thoughts from an OT that's almost retired from 

Vy 73,

Jim Neiger   N6TJ  ZD8Z (back there next month)

-----Original Message----- 
From: john at kk9a.com
Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2014 10:10 AM
To: cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] The two/four-point rule in WPX

There is no way to make contesting fair. Changing north american contacts
back one point would make it more unfair for stations in the Caribbean to
compete with stations in South America.

John KK9A

To: 'Kim Östman' <kim.ostman at tut.fi>, <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] The two/four-point rule in WPX
From: "Randy Thompson K5ZD" <k5zd at charter.net>
Reply-to: k5zd at charter.net
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2014 11:45:20 -0000

>From the CQ WW Handbook, January 1999, by Bob Cox, K3EST

Brief History of the CQ WW Contest

"... [1962] was when the North American two point rule
came into existence. With such a rule, it was hoped that more
activity would occur in the Caribbean and Central America
countries. All these changes were brought into the rules by Frank,

This rule has definitely accomplished its purpose by motivating a lot of
contest expeditions to the Caribbean.  I don't see this rule changing any
time soon.

Randy, K5ZD

CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list