2010 CQ WW SSB Contest Prep - All Kinds Of Information Available To Help Your Strategy Choices

By Jamie Dupree NS3T radio-sport.net
Posted October 18, 2010

Just a few years ago, there wasn't much information to guide operators when it came to prep work for the CQ WW DX Contests, other than the scores in CQ Magazine and a few pointers from someone in your local contest club.
How times have changed.
That's very apparent this year as one surveys what is available on the internet, a wealth of information that can allow you to figure out what the top finishers do in terms of strategy, and how you can take that to another level.
One thing that sets apart CQ WW from other contests is that the logs of all entrants are available on the internet, allowing you to see how others did in 2007, 2008 and 2009.
You can look through all of the 2009 CQ WW DX SSB logs on the CQ WW web site.

View & Analyze Your CQ WW Logs

The data that has been made available by CQ WW logs has now led to the development of several web sites, which allow you to compare and contrast your logs with others.
The newest offering is from Jim Sullivan W7EJ, whom many of you know from his contest call of CN2R in Morocco, where Jim finished 2nd in the World last year in Single Op High Power.
He has started a new web site called LogQso.com, which allows you to churn out a variety of different information from up to three different logs.

This is a screenshot from W7EJ's web site, which shows a graphical presentation of the logs of CN2R, 8P5A and CR2X from last year's CQ WW SSB.

Another Log Analyzer From EI6DX

Also working on software to parse through the CQ WW logs has been Stan EI6DX, whose CQ WW Analyzer gives you a variety of ways to cull data out of CQ WW logs from the last three years.

The graphic shown here details the times and numbers of contacts between North America and Europe in the CQ WW SSB contests of 2007, 2008 and 2009.
It shows very little on 10 meters and 160 meters, with most of the contacts - in yellow - from 20 meter activity.

Just for comparison, the second EI6DX graphic is from the 2009 CQ WW CW contest, again charting out QSO's between North America and Europe. You can see that one month later, there is definitely a difference in band conditions.
You can find the EI6DX analyzer on his web site at ei6dx.com.

Keep Your Butt In The Chair

How can you do better in a contest like CQ WW DX SSB? The answer is really very simple.
You need to spend as much time on the air during the 48 hours of the contest as possible.
A review previously reported by radio-sport.net from Chris Schneider DL8MBS, with help from Michael Hoeding DL6MHW, showed that of the over 3500 Single Op, All Band entries, 87 percent operated less than half the CQ WW DX SSB contest.
Here is a breakdown to show you what that means - only 448 operators who submitted a Single Op log, were on the air for more than 24 hours total in the 2009 CQ WW SSB.

42-48 hours 45 ops 1.3%
36-42 hours 65 ops 1.8%
30-36 hours 122 ops 3.5%
24-30 hours 216 ops 6.1%
18-24 hours 375 ops 10.6%
12-18 hours 598 ops 17.0%
6-12 hours 915 ops 26.0%
0-6 hours 1188 ops 33.7%

The average of all operators was 12 hours on the air in last year's SSB test.
Here is a further breakdown that shows clearly - if you keep you butt in the chair, you stand a pretty good chance to scoring well overall.

47-48 hours - 11 ops 0.3%
46-47 hours - 4 ops 0.1%
45-46 hours - 4 ops 0.1%
44-45 hours - 6 ops 0.2%
43-44 hours - 7 ops 0.2%
42-43 hours - 13 ops 0.4%
41-42 hours - 10 ops 0.3%
40-41 hours - 13 ops 0.4%
39-40 hours - 10 ops 0.3%
38-39 hours - 5 ops 0.1%
37-38 hours - 9 ops 0.3%
36-37 hours - 18 ops 0.5%
35-36 hours - 15 ops 0.4%
34-35 hours - 16 ops 0.5%
33-34 hours - 21 ops 0.6%
32-33 hours - 19 ops 0.5%
31-32 hours - 24 ops 0.7%
30-31 hours - 27 ops 0.8%

Looking For A Soft Spot In CQ Mag

As you scan the results from last year's contest, which are available on the CQ WW website, it doesn't hurt to look for a category that might not have had much competition in previous years.
Your reporter did that a couple of times in the CQ WW CW test, going Single Band on 80 meters, and actually making the "Top Scores" lising in CQ Magazine, most recently last year.
Even in the age of the internet, it's still pretty cool to see your call listed in a magazine, right?
In 2009, only two stations from the US even entered the Single Band 10 meters Low Power category; the same was true on 160 meters.
The winning scores? Just 929 points by KJ4KVC on 10 meters and 385 points by W1WBB on 160 meters.
I don't know of any listing that shows the "lowest" winning scores in a CQ WW test, but it's a reminder that sometimes, you can find a soft spot and still see your callsign in lights.