[Top] [All Lists]

[CQ-Contest] Spotting and disqualification

To: uk-contest@contesting.com, cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Spotting and disqualification
From: Keith Kerr <k.kerr@abdn.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 14:38:24 +0100
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Chris GM3WOJ wrote recently on the UK contest reflector:

'I subscribe to the school of thought that
the DX Cluster has 'de-skilled' our contesting (and DXing) to a noticeable
degree - it's use should be discouraged at every opportunity. Sadly the
trend seems to be in the opposite direction - I guess because contest
organisers are unable or unwilling to disqualify those who claim to be
Unassisted but use the DX Cluster ?'

I agree wholeheartedly with the first sentence.

However, I have to point out to my elder partner in Contest Crime that the 
view expressed in the second sentence, which I also, until recently, pretty 
much shared, may in some cases be incorrect. I refer to the recently 
published CQWW SSB results and in particular the section for SOAB 
UNASSISTED in Europe, won by Tonno ES5TV with Steve GW4BLE as runner-up. 
Note the very small section at the very end of the line scores at the back 
of the journal where disqualifications are mentioned (....and one may ask 
'why so hidden?'). The station which claimed the #1 EU score for SOAB-U on 
3830 features in this section. The stated reason is use of cluster or 
similar and claiming unassisted. I also noted that Bob Cox seems to be 
going out of his way to emphasise the issue of spotting network use and how 
this influences your category in the CQWW contests in the actual write-up 
in the main body of the journal.

Perhaps progress is being made.

Keith GM4YXI (occasionally GM7V)

CQ-Contest mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [CQ-Contest] Spotting and disqualification, Keith Kerr <=