I Just don't get it.
I was trying to refrain from intervening in this never ending debate about
the WPX but...
W7EW can't you understand that no matter how long the WPX is there are more
prefixes available in Europe than there are in Japan.
If there are two similar operators one on East Coast and another on West
coast, the East Coast WILL ALWAYS WIN.
The WPX is THE MOST STUPID LESS DEMANDING CONTEST THERE IS. (Just like the
ARRL from DX)
An operator has only 1 strategic decision to make and ONLY when both HF and
LF are open:
To determine if the value of your QSOs In time range (Forget
those who say rate
is everything - They are wrong because Value is what matters)
is greater on HF or LF.
Once this is determined sit on a frequency and push F1 because multipliers
unlike the CQWW are a function of QSOs. You don't have to look for them or
move them, they just come to you.
But...I like the WPX and the idea that you want to shorten the WPX because
you wrongly think you stand a better chance against the East Coast spoils my
fun and probably 90% of the fun of World Wide operators.
If you want to compete with East Coast operator I suggest the following:
1. Go to an East Cost station and have your bottom kicked by them...
2. Invite East coast operators to the left coast and who knows? You may end
up......?
In the meantime why don't we make the WPX a 48 hour format?
Vy 73
Jose - CT1BOH
ct1boh@mail.telepac.pt
http://www.qsl.net/ct1boh
-----Original Message-----
From: lew@teleport.com <lew@teleport.com>
To: cq-contest@contesting.com <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: [CQ-Contest] WPX debate
>Well,
> Looks like ZD8Z has spoken again. Looks like people read the posts, but
>still don't get it. My single point to all of this is: We need a
>world-wide contest (not contests!) where U.S. Hams can compete against
>each other in a fair fight. The CQ-WPX could be this test.
> If I were like ZD8Z,KQ2M,K3ZO or NH7A then of course I'd want a 96 hour
>contest where I could extend my advantage to the max. What a kick! What
>short sightedness! What a way to kill off contesting! Then only serious
>ops would travel to advantageous sites to play. Look at the long run here.
>There are plenty of tests to assert various degrees of proficiency or
>ability to "cut the mustard" as Jim so aptly put it last go around.
> We need the big league operators in contesting like the above mentioned
>ops. But we need much more a contest where average Joe Schmuck feels that
>he has a fighting chance to play in. This will keep contesting alive with
>interest high.
> 1 contest, gentlemen...thats what I'm talking about.
> Not talking about CQ-WW or ARRL-Dx or looking for a wimp way to win.
> I am talking about fanning the fires of contesting with a fair contest
>that average Joe Ham can try out and get hooked on contesting. Without
>that kind of fodder, the big boys and girls will not have the Q's in the
>future for their tests.
> Trey doesn't need the apology, Jim. He is looking ahead at the future
>of the sport of contesting. You and the rest of the East coast serious
>players need to do the same. Keep it the same old way and watch it die out
>as we do.
> 73 and I remain,
> Lew ex-n7avk
>
> Lew Sayre W7EW lew@teleport.com
> P.O.Box 3110 Fax 503-391-2258
> Salem, Oregon 97302 160M thru 1296MHz
>
>
>
>
>
>
>--
>CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
>Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|