Topband: 2004 ARRL 160M Contest

[Ford Peterson]

Tom wrote:

> I certainly agree with this Mark! The ARRL 160 is more of a
> domestic sweepstakes contest.
> 
> 73, Tom W8JI

For 75% of NA, your description is appropriate.  Your comment is interpreted as having a virtual disdain for one of the most popular contests in NA (SS).  As in any contest with multipliers, bagging 'new ones' can greatly increase your score.  From the rules:

5.1.1. Two points for QSOs with amateurs in an ARRL/RAC Section. 
5.1.2. W/VE stations count five points for DX QSOs. 

5.2. Multipliers: ARRL/RAC Sections (maximum of 80) and DXCC countries (W/VE participants only). 

Several observations:

Besides the WP, CO, ZF tier stations, the vast majority of NA cannot work through the +40 over signal levels to work EU, AU, AF, OC, and SA.  Frankly, most 'off continent' DX never get past the first tier of coastal states--even in the clear.  A spectacular opening could change the equation dramatically, but how often does this occur?

Mark-ON4WW mentions:
"Year after year it is a pain to try and get attention of the NA stations. 
And those are the only ones, WE can work during this contest.
Imho the remedy to this, would be to increase the points attributed to a US 
station working a DX station, significantly. "

Talk about "Pain," try to work a DX from TN or KS or WI or MN, (much less WY, UT, AZ, WA, OR, and CA) when the DX is being pummeled by 50 HP stations on the right coast!  The opening to EU from the West coast is very narrow in time--if an opening even happens.

The notion of opening up DX-to-DX QSOs for score tally would simultaneously cause EU (for example) stations to focus their directional arrays on stations off NA.  This would become a CQWW contest with NA to NA points.  Placing too much emphasis on DX would likely create a situation where so many stations would be calling the DX, very few QSOs would result.  With effectively only 100 KHz to play with, a couple of dozen DX stations running split is really not an option (as has been suggested in previous threads) as the QRM would drop the QSO throughput for the whole NA continent.

Imagine a contest that is truly like CQWW with only NA to DX QSOs counting towards a NA score.  With 1200 people chasing a few dozen DX in 100KHz, how many QSOs would actually be completed?  How many LP QSOs?  How many QRP QSOs?  I would venture to guess that the vast majority of current participants from west of the Mississippi would give up and not even bother to play.  What would THAT do to the total QSO counts for everybody?

Believe me, I have no say in how this contest is run.  I'm only the reporter.  But I think the sponsor (ARRL) is focused on getting as many people to play as possible.  After all, landing the big QSO counts is what makes this fun right?  In spite of what we would fantasize about, 160M is not a DX band (especially during this upcoming weekend).  DX is difficult for much of NA under even the best of conditions.  The vast, vast majority of QSOs are NA to NA.  The ONLY way to increase total participation is to make the playing field as level as possible for as many players as possible.  

This is why the focus of my attention in reporting is to illustrate the conditions geographically.  There is no way a W6 or VE6 can compete with a W1, W2, W3 or W4 in this one if the right coast has decent propagation to EU and other points east.  I would dearly love to report on the DX QSO counts by state.  I think it would be very interesting.  By reporting the NA scores geographically, the geographically handicapped players can still compete with others similarly situated--an incentive to get everybody on the band for the upcoming weekend.

Ford-N0FP
ford at cmgate.com