Topband: Improving the Fabulous CQ 160 Contest

[Herbert Schoenbohm]

KV4FZ said:

> 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.
>

How do you rationalize that, Herb? Grid squares would equalize the
availability of mults (ignoring the argument that grids are smaller the
further you go north/south of the equator) and make the contest a lot more
attractive for those stations who are geographically challenged :>)

Jack, W6NF

Jack,

With the levels of QRM and almost 4 times the participation during the CQ
160 affair, chasing grid squares, makes the low power stations ability to
have fluid exchanges, hold on to frequencies problematic at best. I will
most likely force them to S&P and call a DX  over and over, and if they
every get a marginal DX contact, they may also be required to send their
Grid Square information over and over.  This lowers Q rates for the DX
station, creates more chaos.

Countries over Q's are the goal the framer(s) of this contest envisioned not
grid squares.  Those who are swooning over working grid squares perhaps
should create a grid square 160 meter contest of their own design.  The
meteoric rise in popularity of the Stew has a lot to do with the promoters.
They have certainly earned a place among topbanders.

Perhaps the grid square contest could be a winner as well. But hopefully not
at the expense of gutting an already popular and well working  "fabulous"
contest.

Herb, KV4FZ