[CQ-Contest] CQWW Committee Restructured

[Bob Kupps]

Doesn't ZF have a mathematical scoring advantage over stations on other continents?

      From: Chris Hurlbut <chriskl9a at gmail.com>
 To: Jeffrey Clarke <ku8e at bellsouth.net> 
Cc: cq-contest at contesting.com
 Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2016 3:24 AM
 Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Committee Restructured
   
Someone forgot to tell N6MJ that he is at a disadvantage in ZF.

He's not allowed to win from there.
-Chris KL9A

On Jul 21, 2016 8:36 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
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest