[CQ-Contest] Fwd: WRTC 18 Qualifying

Igor Sokolov ua9cdc at gmail.com
Tue Dec 9 13:11:27 EST 2014 

Rich,
Actually it is 2486 QSO confirmed, not claimed.
May be 3000 is only true for EU but over 2000 CONFIRMED in 24 hours which 
was shown by several stations in different cathegories from NA still means 
an average of almost 100 QSO per hour. Is it not enough? And if activity 
from NA would have been a bit higher (which can be expected with RDXC being 
WRTC selection contest) 3000 would  not be that far away.

73, Igor UA9CDC
P.S. I am thankful to you Rich for this discussion. It really promotes RDXC 
in a good way.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Richard F DiDonna NN3W" <richnn3w at verizon.net>
To: "Igor Sokolov" <ua9cdc at gmail.com>; <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2014 5:29 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Fwd: WRTC 18 Qualifying


> There you go.  The 2014 year where the claimed score was above 2000 QSOs. 
> But, I thought you said that "3000 QSO in 24 hours in RDXC is not uncommon 
> from almost anywhere."
>
> I see no evidence of that being anywhere close to being true from the 
> United States for a single operator.  Can you show me?
>
> 73 Rich NN3W
>
> On 12/8/2014 11:50 PM, Igor Sokolov wrote:
>> Rich,
>> I do not know where you get your data from and I only checked 2014 SOAB 
>> category results at www.rdxc.org
>> It shows
>> 7 KC1XX       2481 QSO confirmed 73, Igor UA9CDC----- Original 
>> Message ----- From: "Richard DiDonna NN3W" <richnn3w at verizon.net>
>> To: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2014 12:32 AM
>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Fwd: WRTC 18 Qualifying
>>
>>
>>> Yah, the USA record for QSOs in RDXC is under 2000 - and that is from a 
>>> station in New England.
>>>
>>>
>>> I think folks need a little perspective on the level of activity in this 
>>> event (i.e., the last time I did it I was dying by 0800 out of sheer 
>>> boredom)...
>>>
>>>
>>> 73 Rich NN3W
>>>
>>>
>>> On 12/08/14, steve.root at culligan4water.com wrote:
>>>
>>> "3000 QSO in 24 hours in RDXC is not uncommon from almost anywhere."
>>>
>>> Let me tell you about Minnesota sometime :)
>>>
>>> 73 Steve K0SR
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Igor Sokolov [mailto:ua9cdc at gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Monday, December 8, 2014 12:12 AM
>>> To: 'David Siddall', wrtc2018 at lists.wrtc2018.de, 
>>> cq-contest at contesting.com
>>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Fwd: WRTC 18 Qualifying
>>>
>>> Dave,Can you support your statement regarding the number of participants 
>>> in RDXC, IARU and WPX with solid figures?ARRL, that was part of 2014 
>>> WRTYC selection, for me is truly regional contest where unlike RDXC we 
>>> can only work US and VE and therefore pretty dull from areas where 
>>> propagation to NA last only few hours. In RDXC you can work any one 
>>> anywhere wich does not fit the discription of a regional contest but 
>>> rather WW contest.I have done ARRL couple of times from the very well 
>>> equipped setup with multiple stacks to only make 500-600 QSOs in 48 
>>> hours while 3000 QSO in 24 hours in RDXC is not uncommon from almost 
>>> anywhere.73, Igor UA9CDC> Thanks for your thoughts. As I noted WAE & 
>>> RDXC were elevated ABOVE CQWPX> and IARU. RDXC & WAE certainly are 
>>> enjoyed by many, they are fun> contests, but they do not draw numbers of 
>>> competitors with worldwide> distribution equivalent to CQWPX & IARU. Do 
>>> we really need social> engineering to push competitors into this or that 
>>> contest and
>>> tell us what> we "should" like? The numbers demonstrate the rankings for 
>>> what we *do*> like as a group, rather than individual preferences.>> 73, 
>>> Dave K3ZJ>>> On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 11:30 PM, Mats Strandberg wrote:>>> 
>>> Dave,>>>> While I do argue with the 2018 organizers on the Assistsd/Non 
>>> Assisted>> issue, I fully support the decision to elevate WAE and RDXC 
>>> to the same>> level and CQWW and CQ WPX.>>>> Why?>>>> Simply becuase 
>>> those two contests are globally considered much bigger >> than>> they 
>>> are in some continents..I do consider the CQ contests superb and >> 
>>> they>> will forever remain as two of my favourite Top Five contests. 
>>> However,>> without question, WAE and RDXC have in late years become even 
>>> more fun to>> participate in - and this not only to Europeans and 
>>> Russians. They are >> now>> by me and many others considered at same 
>>> popularity level as the CQ>> contests.>>>> RDXC is not a regional 
>>> contest. It is a Worldwide contest where Russians>> compete separately 
>>> and th
>>> e rest in a worldwide group. Working DX stations>> is heavily stimulated 
>>> by different points compared to working stations >> from>> the same 
>>> continent. The log checking and penalties system requires better>> 
>>> operator skills compared to some other contests where the contest 
>>> echange>> is more or less given. In RDXC, you nned to make sure you 
>>> receive both >> the>> other stations's callsign and exchange correctly. 
>>> Moreover, you must>> moderate your speed in a way that ensures that the 
>>> other station also >> gets>> your call and exchange correctly. If not, 
>>> penalties for both of you. I >> know>> this has caused some US 
>>> frustration, but in my honest opinion, this >> develop>> and stimulate 
>>> true operator skills rather than skills of relying on the>> database of 
>>> the log program.>>>> WAE used to be a contest I did not pay attention to 
>>> because of QTCs. They>> bothered me because I did not feel I was control 
>>> of them. It was a new >> way>> of contesting and I was against and did 
>>> not work
>>> WAE for many years. Then >> I>> gradualy started working it with 
>>> pleasure but always avoiding exhange of>> the "troublesome" QTCs. One 
>>> day I decided to open my eyes and challenge>> myself to try echanging 
>>> QTCs. From that day I got stuck! The skill-set>> needed to work WAE in 
>>> full extent by exchanging QTCs is different from>> normal contesting and 
>>> the operator that masters that additional >> complexity>> of WAE should 
>>> definitely receive the same credits as the one that runs >> 300+>> rates 
>>> exchanging predictable zones in a CQWW.>>>> It is time for Americans to 
>>> finally explore RDXC and WAE in a serious way>> and with 1000 points 
>>> value, be sure the bands will be boiling also in >> North>> America 
>>> those weekends. Run rates in RDXC are excellent for any station>> 
>>> participating - for sure not only for Russians. Particpate and enjoy>> 
>>> instead of maintaining a prejudiced opinion about these two great 
>>> events!>>>> 73 de Mats RM2D (SM6LRR)>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2014-12-02 23:15 
>>> GMT+03:00 Dav
>>> id Siddall :>>>>> The difference in rules between WRTC2014 and WRTC2018 
>>> that struck me was>>> that the prior emphasis on worldwide contests 
>>> while accommodating the>>> major>>> regionals was abandoned.>>>>>> For 
>>> WRTC2014, only CQWW received full 1000 value, with CQWPX at 950 and>>> 
>>> IARU at 900. Major regional contests such as ARRL, Russian, WAE, AA >>> 
>>> were>>> 900 or less. But for WRTC2018, instead of elevating the truly 
>>> worldwide>>> contests -- CQWPX & IARU -- the organizers instead 
>>> emphasize European>>> regional contests -- 
>>> WAE and Russian -- both of which now get the top >>> 1000>>> 
>>> value.>>>>>> This is a step backward from promoting worldwide 
>>> competition. It >>> elevates>>> two Euro-centric competitions with less 
>>> participation above the more>>> popular worldwide contests as well as 
>>> above the other major regionals >>> such>>> as ARRL and AA. Having lived 
>>> in areas of the world where propagation>>> doesn't support full time 
>>> efforts in the regionals (whether or not one >>> ca
>>> n>>> "work anyone" but for fewer points/mults), I appreciate the 
>>> truly>>> worldwide>>> competitions that we have. It says something that 
>>> these rose to the top>>> in>>> popularity in the free marketplace of 
>>> contests.>>>>>> Just my observation.>>>>>> 73, Dave K3ZJ>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________>>> 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 
>>> listCQ-Contest at contesting.comhttp://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
>>>
>>
>>
>

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list