[CQ-Contest] History of Low Power Category

[John Unger]

I think I remember that a number years ago ARRL or NCJ changed the NAQP 
from 150W to 100W. As I recall, one of the reasons given was that then 
stations would not have to use amps to get up to the 150W level. I was 
surprised at that revelation mainly because I had never thought of doing 
it! Maybe that ~1dB would have helped...

73 - John, W4AU


On 9/16/2014 7:38 AM, Randy Thompson K5ZD wrote:
> I was recently asked why the CQ Contests use 100W as the limit for low power
> and the ARRL Contests use 150W.  I had not really thought about this much
> and wonder if anyone can explain how the limits were chosen.
>
>   
>
> The CQWW introduced a low power category in the writeup for the 1990 CQ WW
> SSB Contest (and the rules for 1991).  It  is assumed that 100W was chosen
> because it was easily accomplished by most barefoot transceivers or radios
> of the time.
>
>   
>
> Can anyone explain the history of the ARRL selection of 150W?  The slightly
> higher power level can be reached by some radios, but it also encourages
> "low power" stations to run an amplifier to gain that extra db between 100W
> and 150W.
>
>   
>
> It would be nice if all contests used the same low power limit.  Not because
> one limit is more right than another, but so there would be less confusion.
> Last year there was one entrant that entered CQWW as low power and then
> realized they had exceeded 100W (I think they ran 110W or 120W).  They asked
> to have their entry reclassified to high power.  Admirable integrity, but
> unfortunately caused by the confusion between ARRL and CQ category limits.
>
>   
>
> Randy, K5ZD
>
>   
>
>   
>
>   
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>