Topband: Use of Remote Receivers During 160 Meter Contests

[Jim Brown]

On Mon,3/16/2015 6:09 AM, mstangelo at comcast.net wrote:
> How would yo modify the rules to permit a level playing field?

There are many possible ways. N6TR has given us one excellent example 
with the Stew Perry contest.

The major problem with the existing rules is the use of multipliers and 
what constitutes a multiplier. Those contesters around the Atlantic 
basin have access to far more country multipliers than those living 
elsewhere. VK is an entire continent, but a single multiplier. Living in 
CA, even when I'm able to catch EU openings lasting a few hours each day 
on 20 and 15, more than half of my QSOs in a DX contest are with JA, 
yielding a single multiplier. And then there's IARU, where the 
multiplier advantage is doubled by making HQ stations a multiplier.

I've seen two ideas floated to solve the multiplier issue. One is to 
make all members of the European Union a single multiplier. That would 
certainly give the east coast a taste of what it's like contesting from 
the western half of the US! A different idea is to provide multipliers 
for VK states and JA prefectures. Either of these ideas move in the 
direction of providing an equivalent number of multipliers.

Another issue, especially with topband contesting, is the point value of 
a QSO. The path from W6/w7/VE7 to VE1/VE9/VY2/W1/W2,W3/W4 is not quite 
as long as from W1/W2/W3 to EU, but it is over land, not water, so there 
is greater loss at the point of earth reflection. Yet a transcontinental 
contact is worth only 40% of an EU contact in ARRL 160, and 20% in 
CQWW160, or a contact within the Carribbean, which is even closer than 
W6/W7 for east coast stations. And then there's the PJ4/P4 advantage in 
the CQ-sponsored contests, where nearly every Q is worth 10 points 
because they're SA islands, as compared to 5 points for NA islands a few 
hundred miles north!

Then there's the issue of population density, also quite important on 
topband and 80M. From my Chicago city lot with 100W, a VERY mediocre 
antenna and no RX antenna, I could work 4X as many US/VE stations as I 
can from W6 with a comparable station. (I do have a far better station 
here, so the QSO ratio is more like 2X).

Scoring rules also matter because they form operating strategies. If EU 
and Caribbean Qs are worth 2.5X a W6/W7/VE7 Q, RX antennas will be 
pointed NE, not W, and only the most serious ops will still be on the 
air after EU sunrise. And I'd bet that many east coast stations have no 
W RX antennas at all.

Now, the arguments advanced against making these sorts of changes are 
mostly about "comparisons with prior years," and "it's a different 
contest, choose those you want to operate." I'd love to hear a 
justification for comparing a 1959 score with a 2014 score. In 1959, we 
logged on paper, sent CW with bugs, kept paper dupe sheets. By the 
mid-60s, many of us used electronic keyers. Then AEA introduced a memory 
keyer, which I remember as very big deal -- I bought one as soon as I 
saw it. And then there was computer logging. And clusters.

All of those are advances in technology, NOT in operator skill, nor in 
the radio performance of a station. There is ZERO justification for 
historical comparisons, except on a year by year basis, and even that is 
likely to be as much due to propagation as the quality of the station or 
the operator(s).

For contesting to be fun, we must have lots of stations to work. The 
current rules discourage many from participating. I work 160M contests 
ONLY to pick up countries, and to finish off QRP WAS. I haven't 
seriously operated a 160M contest in five years, and I have three good 
TX antennas and two full-wavelength reversible Beverages.

There was some logical basis for the existing rules in the days before 
computers, when scores had to be computed with paper and pencil. But 
this is 2015, and nearly any well defined scoring system can be 
calculated on the fly in modern logging software.

Bottom line -- there ARE ways to make the playing field a lot more 
interesting for a lot more stations. The only thing lacking is the WILL 
to do it, and the opposition of those who benefit from their 
geographical advantage under the current system.

73, Jim K9YC