CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Preview of CQWW Rules 2015

To: "Stan Stockton" <wa5rtg@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Preview of CQWW Rules 2015
From: "JIM NEIGER" <n6tj@sbcglobal.net>
Date: Sun, 31 May 2015 16:34:41 -0700
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
AMEN. As one of those originally labeled as a dinosaur some twenty-five years ago because my extensive operations as DX had clearly demonstrated, to me - at least - that, at the time PACKET, was greatly diminishing the skill of operators in DX pileups, and the pileups in contests that I so truly loved. Having provided so many new ones over my decades of operations from VR1W/KB6DA, 8P6J, 9Y4AA, SU1ER, D44BC, ZD8Z, etc., my education has often been painful, and sometimes simply un-fun. The early pileups at ZD8Z in 1968/69 were often pleasant, manageable - can you imagine no-zero beat on CW, no packet, no skimmers, many fewer 10 kilowatts, and up, amplifiers?? Then when I commenced my CQ WW operations from D44BC IN 1985, and listening to my host Julio screaming at the out of control pile-ups "If you don't stop calling out of turn, I will QRT"! And my return in 1989 to Ascension after a twenty years hiatus, and newly-minted BIG signals out of Europe with most of them S9 + 20, and up, and seemingly 90% calling out of turn. I thought, "doesn't anyone LISTEN anymore"?? Short answer: nope, we don't even need to hear your call. You were just spotted on packet, you're 5 and 9 (at least I think that was you, Jim), please QSL. So it became a refuge for me to (1) to stop running the ENDLESS pileups and while everyone was still blasting away, take a half-hour out and play some chess on my computer, or (2) head for CW. It was often amusing, I'd stop transmitting for 30 - 45 minutes, and then sometimes just say ZD8Z once, and it was like the masses had never left.

And then some geniuses apparently decided we needed code readers and skimmers. I would LOVE for them to accompany me to a CW DXcontest sometime, and ask them to show me how to do it. Trust me, gentlemen, you haven't lived until you have HUNDREDS of stations calling you, all zero beat with one another, and all S5. Maybe. And 99% of them calling NOT realizing they couldn't be copied, and then of course, incessant calling. SKIMMER GENIUS: Thanks A lot. At least packet frequency inaccuracies allowed them to be maybe slightly off zero-beat with me, and to one another, and you could run rate. So now, anyone who know me, knows to immediately call 3 to 5 up. duh.

I guess the important take-aways and lessons learned for you current youngsters and contesting enthusiasts of the future, my Axiom No. 27 might apply: BE CAREFUL OF WHAT YOU ASK

Vy 73

Jim Neiger   N6TJ

-----Original Message----- From: Stan Stockton
Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2015 1:48 PM
To: Barry
Cc: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Preview of CQWW Rules 2015

No, Barry. It's drawing a line to preserve some semblance of skill required to work a CW Contest. Using your thinking, I see no reason to disallow CW Readers in High Speed CW Competitions.

Stan, K5GO

Sent from Stan's IPhone



On May 24, 2015, at 1:08 PM, Barry <w2up@comcast.net> wrote:

I believe the likelihood of this is up there with the argument to preserve paper logs and dupe sheets. Time and technology continue, and we adapt to the changes.

Barry W2UP

On 5/24/2015 10:59, Stan Stockton wrote:
If nothing else good comes of the TO7A operation, perhaps a renewed interest to preserve SOAB instead of eliminating it will be the result. That's a good thing.

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

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