[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] real time scoreboards

To: <k1ttt@arrl.net>, "'Cq-Contest'" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] real time scoreboards
From: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2006 08:16:20 -0500
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Gee, it seems to me that single ops who wish to win should ENCOURAGE packet

Packet is obviously a drawback, not an advantage.

I think there are enough examples here that we can let the "I lost because
he cheated on packet" sentiment die.

73, kelly

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Robbins K1TTT" <k1ttt@arrl.net>
To: "'Cq-Contest'" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Cc: <live@cqww.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2006 6:05 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] real time scoreboards

> >
> > Eric you said: ""Allowing single operator stations to have more fun in
> > contests seems
> > beneficial to our beloved sport.  And encouraging part-time participants
> > to operate more of the contest also seems beneficial.""
> > Those were the same kind of excuses that were used in the early days of
> > the
> > DX Packet Cluster and look at that hornets nest now. Any outside system
> > being utilized whether it be clusters or scoreboards or whatever will
> > always
> > provide an unfair advantage.
> Long ago, and not so far away, when PacketCluster(tm) was in it's infancy
> and the great discussion about single op use of it was raging in letters
> the editors around the world.... a great s/o coined the phrase to describe
> the s/o using cluster as 'single op - distracted'.  And so it has become.
> Serious single ops 'do it on their own', and always will, and the ones who
> do it properly will win, hands down.
> Just take a look at the record, just a quick comparison of results from
> sept 2006 cq mag pages 103 and 110.
> s/o s/o-a
> k5zd/1 6.9M k1jb 1.9M
> n2nt 5.1M w2re 3.2M
> k3cr 5.2M w2up/3 6.1M
> k4zw 4.4M k1pt/4 2.3M
> n2ic/5 3.3M k5ya 3.1M
> k6xx 1.4M K6rim .6M
> n6cw/7 2.5M w7zr .6M
> k8ir .6M w8mj .9M
> w9re 3.9M n9ck 1.1M
> k0eu 1.6M n0at 1.4M
> in only 2 call areas out of 10 did a so-a beat the so... and then not by
> much... and personally in at least one of those I think he would have beat
> him unassisted anyway.  Now are you going to tell me that any of those
> area winners were cheating and using packet??  How about the next 10 guys
> down the list who lost the unassisted category but could have won the
> assisted, if you were cheating and using the cluster why not claim it and
> the winner of the assisted class instead???
> I repeat, and generalize... If a single op is looking for assistance
> of their station to try to gain a tactical advantage, THEY ARE LOSING!
> You really want to level the playing field?  Make EVERYONE use the cluster
> (require s/o's to log at least 1 qso from a cluster spot every 15
> make EVERYONE report their score every 5 minutes(and spend the next minute
> analyzing the other scores during which they are not allowed to log a
> make EVERYONE follow cluster generated propagation predictions(you aren't
> allowed to work anyone outside the 10db snr curve on the map), turn
> into single-op DISTRACTED class and bring then all down to the same low
> performance level.  Good operators don't need the motivation, information,
> or entertainment that spotting nets and scoreboards provide, they already
> know it, and the results show it!
> David Robbins K1TTT
> e-mail: mailto:k1ttt@arrl.net
> web: http://www.k1ttt.net
> AR-Cluster node: 145.69MHz or telnet://dxc.k1ttt.net
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
CQ-Contest mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>