Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+CQWW\s+RTTY\s+interesting\s+rules\s*$/: 12 ]

Total 12 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] CQWW RTTY interesting rules (score: 1)
Author: "K1TTT" <K1TTT@ARRL.NET>
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 14:59:51 +0000
If you still haven't looked into operating CQWW RTTY this coming weekend please give it a serious thought. This is a MUCH different event than CW and SSB In this one there are NO ZERO POINT QSO's. An
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-09/msg00157.html (7,879 bytes)

2. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW RTTY interesting rules (score: 1)
Author: Steve London <n2icarrl@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 10:41:54 -0600
Flame on.... RTTY activity has dramatically increased in the past decade. Hasn't RTTY activity reached the point that the CQWW RTTY could have the same rules as the CQWW CW and SSB contests ? Almost
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-09/msg00159.html (9,293 bytes)

3. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW RTTY interesting rules (score: 1)
Author: Steve London <n2icarrl@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 14:07:19 -0600
No. EU's get 1 point for working other EU. The 2 point rule only applies to North Americans working other North Americans in a different North American country. Hey, I'm hurt a lot worse by this than
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-09/msg00160.html (8,286 bytes)

4. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW RTTY interesting rules (score: 1)
Author: "Ed Muns" <w0yk@msn.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 10:46:47 -0700
Alternatively, CQ WW CW/SSB could adopt the superior rules of CQ WW RTTY. Ed - W0YK CQ RTTY Contest Director -- Ed Muns Muns Vineyard - www.munsvineyard.com FaceBook - www.facebook.com/munsvineyard _
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-09/msg00163.html (11,294 bytes)

5. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW RTTY interesting rules (score: 1)
Author: "Tom Osborne" <w7why@verizon.net>
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 14:42:03 -0700
Hi Steve It might be fun from some parts of the country, but here on the left coast, working DX in a contest is usually about a 1-2 hour stint in the morning for the Eu opening (if theres an opening
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-09/msg00164.html (8,714 bytes)

6. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW RTTY interesting rules (score: 1)
Author: Barry <w2up@comcast.net>
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 13:26:20 -0600
Perhaps it should be the other way around. The one point QSOs help equalize the inequities of the CQWW CW/SSB tests. For example, EU s get 2 pointers for QSOs a stone's throw away in another country
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-09/msg00165.html (11,233 bytes)

7. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW RTTY interesting rules (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 19:26:18 -0700
That doesn't seem to me to be a very good reason to turn a DX contest into a domestic one. In ANY DX contest, you're pretty much competing regionally anyway, and it has been that way for decades. 73,
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-09/msg00166.html (9,467 bytes)

8. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW RTTY interesting rules (score: 1)
Author: "Richard L. King" <k5na@ecpi.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 01:22:57 +0000
I would like to see a compromise between the two. The only real awkward part of the CQWW Phone and CW rules is that you are forced to work zero point QSOs for multiplier credit. Each QSO should be wo
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-09/msg00167.html (13,171 bytes)

9. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW RTTY interesting rules (score: 1)
Author: Andrei Stchislenok <asnp3d@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 22:41:39 -0300
I doubt if K3EST would honor this... I would say, no way -- 73's Andrei EW1AR-NP3D -- DXCC RTTY via LoTW only Who has what? - World Wide Rating Please visit: www.k4fo.com/cqrtty/ ____________________
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-09/msg00168.html (12,964 bytes)

10. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW RTTY interesting rules (score: 1)
Author: "Robert Chudek - K0RC" <k0rc@citlink.net>
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 22:18:22 -0500
I suspect from the perspective of a EU competitor, having the States as multipliers tends to keep their antennas and attention focused on the USA a lot longer. For each USA competitor it makes us 50
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-09/msg00169.html (12,040 bytes)

11. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW RTTY interesting rules (score: 1)
Author: LY8O <ly8o@ot.lt>
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 08:27:19 +0300
Pardon? Have I missed something? VI POINTS: ... 2. Contacts between stations on the same continent but different countries, two (2) points. ... Did you mean WW RTTY already moved to this ununderstand
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-09/msg00170.html (8,626 bytes)

12. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW RTTY interesting rules (score: 1)
Author: "Marijan Miletic" <s56a@bit.si>
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 08:47:33 +0300
Alternatively CQ WW RTTY may have a better Director :-) Bobo-san missed me twice within hundred yards while visiting Balkans. I like CW overrating over RTTY - people proud of using their brains to d
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-09/msg00182.html (8,801 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu