Hi pile up rates are nice, likewise that anything works as an antenna when the solar flux is so high, but.... With high flux numbers, hi rates, high bands opened 24h x day and people cought by the 10
Wally, also the ARRL dx, on a dx perspective, is a run contest but it doesn't desertize some bands and leaves room for strategy. 73, Mauri I4JMY -- CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-co
Brian, first of all, to move in the most populated band and run (whose tactic is also the only available to increase the number of a very generic mult like pfxes) is definitely a strategy but also th
Mauri, I respectfully beg to differ with your conclusion. You formulate a strategy based on the rules and knowledge of the contest--not design a contest that somehow fits your idea of what constitute
Hi Mauri, Although you may have some reasons to make the posting of yours I think we are talking about different things here. CQWW and CQWPX contests are contests with different phylosophy. WPX conte
Well, I must disagree somewhat on strategy. While there is less strategy than CQWW, and it is primarily a run contest, I can point out some strategy considerations. 1) At least stateside, it is very
There used to be an important strategy element in WPX, at least for single ops. Choosing the right time to be on the band. That was when it was 30 hours out of 48. Most ops would have to give up good
I think both sides could be easily satisfied (I4JMY and others) ,if Steve and the WPX committee accepts just a slight change : To count prefixes on each band as separate multipliers for SOAB,M/S and
Except that the WPX rules for the last couple of years allow stateside to stateside to count as 1 point, although there is no doubling of points 40m and below. I suppose this turns the strategy sligh
In my view, this would make WPX even less interesting. By working new mults on every band, virtually every QSO would be a new multiplier, so there would be no reason to look for mults, or even strate