CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] A New Perspective [was:WRTC Spot/Log Correlation]

To: CQ Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] A New Perspective [was:WRTC Spot/Log Correlation]
From: DL8MBS <prickler.schneider@t-online.de>
Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2006 23:52:01 +0200
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Kelly Taylor wrote:

>So on that basis, I see no value in a set of rules where the only 
>distinction is going to be equipment.
>
>  
>
>Don't you see: the regional disparity you use to discredit my argument is 
>EXACTLY WHY I don't see value in Ev's idea.
>
And how about the operation time also mentioned? About two thirds of the 
logsending participants operate less than halftime, about three quarters 
less than two thirds of the possible time. They/we are stuck in score 
lists as would be ones in athletics mixing runners from 100m to 42 km 
together. Isn´t it a biiig difference if the one ahead of me by five 
qsos did it with three hours more or did it with three hours less 
operation time? Isn´t that information the starting point for all 
comparisoins about skill and equipment?

Again as Sylvan said:

"They are not asking for the rules to be changed!!  They are not asking for
special rules!! They are asking for more information!!"

73, Chris (DL8MBS)



_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>