Damn, Jim, that’s pretty harsh!
CQWW isn’t my favorite either.
But the players who like it are not “disgusting” people, or simple minded.
73, de Hans, KØHB
“Just a Boy and his Radio”™
________________________________
From: CQ-Contest <cq-contest-bounces+kzerohb=gmail.com@contesting.com> on
behalf of Jim Brown <k9yc@audiosystemsgroup.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 2, 2020 5:17:08 AM
To: cq-contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: [CQ-Contest] CQWW is a Great Contest -- NOT!
I continue to be amazed (disgusted) by those who think this is a great
contest. It is simple-minded to the extreme -- for the vast majority of
the sations we work, our logging program fills in the exchange. The only
challenges are getting the call right and staying in sync with SO2R. And
thanks to archaic scoring rules (think the 1940s), if you're not close
to the Atlantic basin, you're not really in the contest. From W6, I use
DX contests like CQWW and ARRL DX only to see how well my antennas work.
This year, I spent 5 hours, mostly trying to work EU on 80 and 40.
Everything else was dullsville (how much fun is it working 500 JAs when
they provide one mult per band?).
Indeed, CQWW's only virtue is that it is not US/NA centric, and the WPX
events are an order of magnitude better.
73, Jim K9YC
_______________________________________________
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
|