CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WPX rules, it finally happened

To: "N2GC" <n2gc@aol.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WPX rules, it finally happened
From: "Radio K0HB" <kzerohb@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 18:31:06 -0800 (PST)
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Why should I wait 30 seconds to hear an ID?  My time is just as valuable as the 
run-station.  As you point out, I could make 2 or 3 more Q's in the time I'm 
expected to wait for him to favor his audience with an ID.


And who are those "common folks" who should just go away?




73, de Hans, K0HB/K7




🌵 Sent from Arizona 🌞




On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 19:08, N2GC <n2gc@aol.com="mailto:n2gc@aol.com";>> wrote:


On Jan 30, 2014, at 10:14 AM, Marc Domen <on7ss.oo9o@gmail.com> wrote:


> And why not put in the rules to id after every contact.  Would it bring the

> number of QSO's down.

> 

> It probably will, but then the odds would be even for all.


Id after every contact does level the playing field for everyone in the 
competition. IMHO I think this would be a good rule. 


The argument that less QSO's would result is not necessarily true.  Looking at 
Valery R5GA's record rates website. 


http://rate.r5ga.com/


There are a few well known single ops in the top ten that I'd after every 
contact. In fact a few had the best rate some years in certain contests. 


73 Mike N2GC



_______________________________________________

CQ-Contest mailing list

CQ-Contest@contesting.com

http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>