CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Committee Restructured

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Committee Restructured
From: Jim Brown <k9yc@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Reply-to: k9yc@arrl.net
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 15:38:22 -0700
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
On Mon,7/18/2016 3:13 PM, Randy Thompson K5ZD wrote:
Other than moving some tectonic plates, what do you suggest would make CQ WW
more interesting for those not bordering the Atlantic Ocean?

Not useful to complain without offering a suggestion.

MANY times I have noted the need for updating scoring rules to the modern age, and I have made some suggestions. All were promptly rejected as "changing the nature of the contest." The scoring rules date to the time when we all had to do it by adding and multiplying numbers with paper and pencil. Those archaic, super-simple rules are what make most US DX contests fun only for folks in the Atlantic basin, where the vast majority of multipliers are. And keeping them the same so that 50 year old records can be compared with modern scores is really silly -- in those old days, we had no automation at all, logged on paper with paper dupe sheets. Even comparing today with ten years ago is silly, and for the same reasons.

To me, the CQWW contests are the dumbest of all -- except for a few countries like UA, VE, and K, all you have to copy is the call, because the whole country is in the same zone so the computer fills in the zone for you.

73, Jim K9YC


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

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