CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Get Rid of the Assisted Category

To: "Paul O'Kane" <pokane@ei5di.com>, <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Get Rid of the Assisted Category
From: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2006 21:52:03 -0600
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paul O'Kane" <pokane@ei5di.com>
To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 17, 2006 12:40 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Get Rid of the Assisted Category


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Robert Naumann" <w5ov@w5ov.com>
To: "'Dave Lawley'" <g4buo@compuserve.com>; <cq-contest@contesting.com>

I agree with Dave G4BUO that there's a fundamental
difference between SO and SO-Assisted entry classes,
and I have no inclination to support contests which
do not recognise this.

I would agree with this as well, IF there were strong statistical support to 
suggest that SO-A ops are at a significant advantage to SO ops.

The empirical evidence strongly suggests that the "assisted" class is at 
best a major distraction or a tool to meet other objectives than merely 
winning a contest.

If SO-A was such an advantage, the SO-A guys would consistently beat the 
unassisted. That doesn't happen. In contest after contest, the undistracted 
ops always outperform the SO-distracted ops. Which goes back to an adage in 
contesting: rate wins contests. You can't get rate if you're always chasing 
spots and the fewer Qs you have to multiply, the less each multiplier is 
worth.

One contest where an SO beats an SO-A could be an anomaly. But almost 
without fail, those who claim assisted -- even with the most serious of 
operations under their belt -- always fall behind the unassisted.

So I think we can conclude two things: 1. there is no advantage to cheating 
on assisted (if the most serious guys who don't cheat can't beat the 
unassisted, where's the advantage?) and 2. there remains little need to 
distinguish the two.

Single op is single op. One butt in chair. One person does all the 
operating. And if one person can do it with more than one radio, that's an 
advantage they have earned through lots and lots of hard work (and that's 
aside from installing the hardware) and which they should be due.

If packet really created an advantage, I'd say no way. But since year after 
year shows it doesn't, I don't see why it matters.

73, kelly
ve4xt

ps: I don't use packet, by the way. 
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

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