What's the point of that "real RST and serial number" discussion if the LOG
checking is not being done at all?
IMHO if it's a contest - let's get proper LOG checking and judgment.
If it's just for fun - please don't call it a "contest", call it something
else, for instance "a QSO party". Get on the air and have some fun.
73 Yuri VE3DZ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard L. King" <k5na@texas.net>
To: <topband@contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 3:49 PM
Subject: Topband: CQWW 160M Contest Serial Numbers
> This is the CQWW 160M Contest, not the ARRL Sweepstakes.
>
> The CQWW contests (both 160M and HF) are not generally exchange
> orientated, because they are callsign orientated. All you need for DX
> QSOs is the callsign to fill in the exchange.
>
> Yes, years ago the CQWW 160M Contest had you send a serial number.
> But they stopped that because it made 50% (my estimated number, not
> based on fact) of the QSOs too hard to make. Here are the considerations:
>
> Sending serial numbers = More accuracy for the exchange and more
> solid QSOs. But a slower pace and more repeats. Also, likely more
> copying errors in logs received making more bad QSOs and score reductions.
>
> Not sending serial numbers = Easier QSOs, higher QSO rates, bigger
> scores, more excitement, more activity, and likely to attract more
> casual contesters and DXers. End results are more logs and a bigger
contest.
>
> The contest is what it is and it isn't necessarily a test of your
> ability to copy a precise exchange. There are other contests that
> require you to do that. Enjoy the CQWW 160M Contest as it is.
>
> 73, Richard - K5NA
>
> k5na@ecpi.com
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|