Topband: Improving the Fabulous CQ 160 Contest

[Herbert Schoenbohm]

> At 1/7/2009 12:29 AM, Jim Brown wrote:
> >On Tue, 6 Jan 2009 21:26:20 -0500, Victor A. Kean, Jr. wrote:
> >
> > >For the 2010 edition of CQ 160 contest, I propose the following
> > >changes as followons to the 2009 changes:
> >
> > >1.  Make the exchange 59(9) grid where "grid" is 4 character
> > >Maidenhead grid square, a-la the Stew Perry test.

In short, "If it Ain't Broke don't try to fix it."

The CQ 160 Meter, contest ever since 160 meter pioneer Charles O Brien,
W2EQS put the idea together, has consistenly remained very popular and does
not IMHO need to be restructured to make it a clone of the Stew Perry
distance challenge.  They are both great distinctively different types of
contests and enobled by their difference.

Here are some objections:

(1)  A Grid Square exchange would cut back on participation and make low
power and qrp stations really struggle to even have some reasonable fun.

(2)  The Stew requires more information than what is required for a
legitimate DXCC contact the Raison d'etre for the CQ Contest.  The end
result with the penalty clauses in the  CQ contest would stiffle overall
participation and result in the particpant, although he got the call
correct, just deleting the contact without the correct GS to reduce
liability to penalty. It would also cause an exposure to be unfairly busted
on the other end. IMHO so many rely on the CQ 160, especially overseas, to
build up their DXCC totals.

(3) My only objection has been the disproportionate advantage 10 point
advantage that Caribbean stations located along the SA coast, only 350 miles
south of me, have over other Caribbean and Central American stations. There
is little chance when you have to take a 5 point reduction for NA stations
when all other conditions are almost exactly the same.  In fact the distance
from, lets say P4 in Aruba, is closer to the midwest and western stations.
Yet they get twice the points for a W/VE mainland contact.  I know it isn't
fair, and I can't ever win any top slots under those circumstances. But that
is the way the contest was set up by its founder and I still think it is the
best.  The same  disadvantage is true for C4 and EA8 which works NA stations
and Europe for 10 pointers while Europeans are catching mostly
intracontinental 5 pointers. We just need to work twice as hard to compete.

Again, changing something that works so well and chasing Grid Squares in my
veiw would not make it a better contest  Let SP be SP and CQ 160 be CQ 160!


Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ


.