[CQ-Contest] CQWW Committee Restructured

[Deepak VU2CDP]

Dave:
Here in India we are doing just all that you have mentioned with respect to
SCQP.  A complete reboot of the Himalayan DX Contest; rules will be
published on the ARSI website tomorrow. It will be on 20-21 August, brought
forward from November. DX works Asia, not just VU, etc.

As for CQWW, those of us here in Asia who have a perennial propagation
disadvantage have no chance of winning any of the big boy categories. Yet
if you look at score submissions of the last few years, you will observe an
upward trend. This is largely because ops are getting on air for fun, not
for winning. The serious efforts are largely focused on doing well in Asia
standings than World standings. All this with the current rules.

73,
Deepak VU2CDP
Contest & Awards Manager - ARSI

On 22 Jul 2016 02:18, "Dave Edmonds" <dave at pkministrywebs.com> wrote:

> I'm enjoying this topic.... Here's my personal experience relating to
> contest management.... hang in there with me...
>
> I believe that one of the primary reasons for making a contest rule change
> is to increase  activity which will result in more log submissions.
>
> I was involved with the recent overhaul of the South Carolina QSO Party.
> Our primary purpose was to increase on-air activity, which will also
> increase log submissions. We wanted to give the competitive ops something
> to shoot for as well as be inviting for the casual ops. Our team created a
> "new" SCQP. Activity has increased by 160% during the last two contests.
>
> Here a few of the "out of the box" changes that we made:
>
> 1. Offered double QSO points to SC stations for all out-of-state contacts.
> *2. Offered SC stations the opportunity to work other SC stations for
> county multipliers. Increased multipliers by 46 per mode.*
> 3. Added eight Bonus Stations in multiple locations.
> 4. Created a "balanced" awards program - same number of awards for in-state
> and out-of-state stations.
> 5. Changed the date of the contest! (a radical change).
>
> Prior to 2015, SC stations were only worth QSO points and no county
> multiplier. During the 2014 event, I remember observing 8-10 SC stations
> "running" within 25 kcs on of each other because there was no multiplier
> incentive. The only contest mode for SC stations was to "run, run, run".
> Our new county multiplier rule created the necessity for all competitive
> stations to "Run" as well as "S&P". This change also was inviting to the
> casual operators. In my opinion, this rule change was the 'tipping point'
> which helped us achieve a166% increase in log submissions during our last
> two contests.
>
> How does this relate to the current discussion...?
>
> The idea of making US states and VE provs multipliers as well as increasing
> the same country QSO point value from 0 to  point in the CQWW is similar to
> our rule changes, but on a much, much larger scale. If these two ideas were
> implemented, there should be much more activity on the less active bands at
> off-peak times, while given us an incentive to stay involved with the
> contest. I typically operate single band, so this would be a very positive
> change. These changes would also give the casual operators and 'rookies'
> the opportunity to become more involved with contesting.
>
> Looking forward to the next CQWW and the next SCQP!
>
> 73s Dave WN4AFP
> SCQP Team Leader
> www.scqso.com
>
> On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 10:17 AM, Jeff Clarke <ku8e at bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> > I don't believe that CQWW has ever been a contest that truly has had a
> > level playing field. Those stations on the continental boundaries have
> > always had a big advantage. Not that they really need that scoring
> > advantage because in many cases they already enjoy a propagation
> advantage
> > as well. Plus the US east coast has always enjoyed a big advantage
> because
> > of its proximity to Europe.
> >
> > I would like to propose the following:
> >
> > 1. Get rid of the tiered points system. Same number of points for each
> QSO
> > , except for maybe the following - 1 point for EU--EU QSO's and 1 point
> for
> > USA/VE to US/VE QSO's.
> >
> > 2. Allow USA to USA QSO'S. This will level the playing field vs EU. If
> you
> > don't like that then only allow QSO's between EU countries for multiplier
> > credit only.
> >
> > 3. Make each US state a multiplier. This contest is run by a US
> > organization so there should be an incentive added for those outside the
> US
> > to work us.
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> > Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Droid
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Dave Edmonds
> PK Ministry Webs
> 864.288.6678
> dave at pkministrywebs.com
> www.pkministrywebs.com
> "Webs from the Heart"
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>