[CQ-Contest] Rule Changes for the CQ WW WPX SSB and CW Contests in 2021

Jeff Clarke ku8e at ku8e.com
Mon Nov 16 15:58:07 EST 2020

Why even bother to have a distributed category?  It's so EASY to setup 
one station to remote into. In fact I did it with someone in CA who 
wasn't even setup as a remote station beforehand for the California QSO 
Party. I took me less than a day of research and work to get it working. 
Check out this excellent presentation Gerry, W1VE gave to the YCCC on 
Zoom on how to do it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rl8-HR9bQyU  Plus 
no special equipment is needed to do this. It's free.

To add to what K8MR wrote why make a special category for M/M when it's 
such a small percentage of the total number of stations that are on the air?

Jeff KU8E

On 11/16/2020 03:14 PM, David Gilbert wrote:
> It's a new M/M category, not a replacement for the existing M/M 
> category.   It's an "addition", not a "change".   What causes that to 
> be such a bad idea?  Maybe it is, but I'm having a difficult time 
> seeing it.  If anything it makes an interesting possibility for lesser 
> stations to collaborate, and I could imagine that it opens up some 
> interesting strategy considerations.
> Dave   AB7E
> "The 2021 CQ WW WPX RTTY, SSB and CW contests will include a new
> Multi-Transmitter Distributed category.  Stations operating in this 
> category
> may have a maximum of six transmitted signals, one per band at any one 
> time,
> from stations in different locations.  All equipment, including
> remotely-controlled equipment, must be located in same DXCC entity and CQ
> Zone.  Six bands may be activated simultaneously.   This is a new,
> stand-alone category.  It is not intended to replace, or compete with, 
> other
> multi-operator categories."
> On 11/16/2020 11:42 AM, K8MR via CQ-Contest wrote:
>> The more troubling change to me is the essentially no-limits 
>> distributed multiops. Competitive Multi-op, especially multi-multi, 
>> over the years has been a category for conspicuous consumption 
>> station builders, combined with the chance for folks to spend a 
>> weekend hanging out with other serious contesters. With COVID I 
>> understand a place for distributing some stations over a relatively 
>> small geographical area. And likewise having remote operators 
>> operating a station with the equipment and antennas in one place.  
>> But having a multi with transmitters and receivers in Maine and in 
>> Miami, and anywhere in between, switching back and forth between 
>> bands to take advantage of propagation advantages from a particular 
>> location, is crazy. While this change is presently just for WPX, if 
>> it is also a test run for CQWW, it's a very bad idea.
>> While over the years I've done a lot of multi-ops from K8AZ, mostly 
>> in the ARRL and CQWW DX tests, operating as part of a "multi" while 
>> sitting at my own station leaves me cold. And the contests benefit 
>> from having more calls available to work, rather than putting in 
>> single call "multi" efforts tying up lot of stations and people.
>> 73  -  Jim  K8MR
> _______________________________________________
> 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