CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Preliminary 2010 CQ WPX SSB/CW Contest Rules

To: "Rick Tavan N6XI" <rtavan@gmail.com>, "David Pruett" <k8cc@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Preliminary 2010 CQ WPX SSB/CW Contest Rules
From: "DL8MBS" <prickler.schneider@t-online.de>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 08:09:31 +0100
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
From: "Rick Tavan N6XI"
>However, there is no need to have different
> rules for M/S in different contests. All it does is create confusion.

Different rules create different flavours for different likings. Who wants
to eat the same thing everytime? But maybe I´m too small an operator to
really see the upcoming apocalypse. My first humble impression was that of a
clearer and very realistic seperation of the different hardware leagues. If
you have that wealth of otherwise unoccupied operators und rigs (capable of
transmitting everywhere everytime) than go for M/2 or better M/M. Only the
absolute minority of unworked DR2- or IZ7-stations will call CQ by
themselves. Go for calling CQ and collecting their calls. Why reduce the fun
possible with your hardware by letting the guys only transmit for working
multipliers?
And please don´t denounce that renewed category as "beer&grill"-category -
it is a category where people can learn to use a given and invariably small
equipment to the maximum and then can compare the outcome realistic to that
of others - with no striking arguments like "They are a multi/multi-capable
station from a different and completely uncomparable league".
I´m not that disturbed. Car racing still has survived with not sending
F1-machines and stock cars on the same race. But may be apocalypse is closer
than I can see...

Best 73 and gl,
Chris (www.dl8mbs.de)

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

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