On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 11:50:09PM -0400, Joe Subich, K4IK wrote:
> > Let's take a look at some of the HF contests that use state/section
> > multipliers:
> >
> > ARRL 10 Meter Contest: DC is its own multiplier
> > ARRL RTTY Roundup DC is its own multiplier
> > ARRL International DX Contest: DC is its own multiplier
> > CQ World Wide 160 Contest: DC is its own multiplier
> > ARRL 160 Meter Contest: DC is considered part of the
> > MDC multiplier
> > ARRL November Sweepstakes: DC is considered part of the
> > MDC multiplier
> > NCJ North American QSO Party: DC is considered part of the
> > MDC multiplier
> > NCJ North American Sprint: DC status unclear
> > CQ World Wide RTTY: DC status unclear
> >
> > The idea that adding DC as a multiplier to one contest would somehow
> > force it to be added as a multiplier in every other contest is just silly.
> > DC is already its own multiplier in four very popular HF competitions.
>
> CQ World Wide RTTY: DC is considered part of MD
Really? That's not what I read:
http://www.cq-amateur-radio.com/RTTY%20Rules%20200491404.pdf
"One multiplier point for each U.S. state (48) and each Canadian call area (14)
on each band. Please use only U.S. Postal Service abbreviations to identify
states (e.g., Michigan=MI; Massachusetts=MA; Ohio=OH). One multiplier point
for each country in the ARRL and/or WAE country lists on each band. Note:
KL7 and KH6 are counted as country multipliers only and not as state
multipliers. One multiplier point for each CQ zone worked on each band.
Maximum of 40 Zones per band."
If one reads this literally, a QSO with a D.C. station cannot count for
any multiplier other than the zone 5 multiplier, as the District of Columbia
is neither a state, nor a Canadian call area, nor a DXCC or WAE country.
> Again, if DC is a multiplier every Indian reservation, national park,
> monument and federal facility should be a separate multiplier. They
> certainly have the same "status." This applies to ALL contests.
I think that's a real stretch.
> Making DC a separate multiplier for the sake of another multiplier
> or to appeal to a small group of participants just doesn't add up.
Personally, I think clarity of status is the most important thing.
In the case of NAQP, the mult status of DC is pretty clear, so any suggestion
that it be changed should be based on something like consistency with other
contests. If DC were treated the same way in every contest that had "state"
multipliers, wouldn't it make it easier for everyone?
--
Kenneth E. Harker WM5R
kenharker@kenharker.com
http://www.kenharker.com/
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|