[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] cheating with packet - RD3A case

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] cheating with packet - RD3A case
From: Steve London <n2icarrl@gmail.com>
Reply-to: n2ic@arrl.net
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 18:27:40 -0700
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Excellent analysis, Tonno !

Questions for the rest of you:

- Does anyone believe that RD3A was not cheating ?  If so, please explain your 

- Does anyone still believe that packet cheaters cannot be caught ?

It is most disappointing that this kind of analysis is not being applied to all 
SOAB-claimed logs by the contest adjudicators. In the 2006 CQWW CW results, I 
know of one case where a high-scoring (top-20) USA competitor said he was 
SOAB-Assisted in his 3830 writeup, but (accidentally) submitted his log as 
SOAB-Unassisted. Surely this kind of analysis, done by the log-checkers, would 
have detected and questioned his error.

Steve, N2IC

Tõnno Vähk wrote:
> If a station is using packet and getting meaningful addition to his mult 
> count from it then it is also detectable from the log and he can be 
> disqualified. You can jump around in frequencies or do whatever you want, if 
> you keep hitting lately spotted mults too often it becomes suspicious, if you 
> start hitting it them all the time it becomes clear. For SOAB later into the 
> contest (like last 12 hours), once you cheat already, it becomes very 
> difficult to adhere to well planned cheating strategy and you start to hit 
> the spots too often or all the time. Let the following story be a good 
> example. I have posted this to a private reflector what I was strongly asked 
> to post it also to CQ Contest and thus I do it. RD3A (RD3AF) is a known 
> packet cheater in EU and so far has not been disqualifed yet. It is a great 
> sorrow and pity that an operator of that great skills and potential and huge 
> station is spoiling its reputation and future by platantly cheating with 
> cluster. It is a great p
ity that this has been so widespread in EU and espcially former socialist block 
of EU but by bringing those issues up we will clean the mess and make 
contesting a better place. I agree to most Jim (N6TJ) is saying and at the same 
time urge hime and the others to bring evidence to light and put more peer 
pressure on the cheaters until CQ Committee will take appropriate action. 
Trying to lead the way here is my letter about RD3A analysis to another 
relfector a month ago (this is ES5TV, 73):
> ****
> I have looked at the logs of CQWW CW 2006 EU top 10 SOAB HP stations. It 
> looks like that:
> CU2A  6208    155     519
> LZ9W  4608    139     474
> G4BUO 3718    144     495
> TM6X  3539    150     471
> S5ØA  3510    160     483
> RD3A  3978    164     555
> ES5RR 4302    143     477
> GD6IA 3904    132     453
> TK5EP 4259    118     407
> DL3YM 3449    141     439
> I compared the worked S&P QSOs and worked S&P MULTS against the cluster spots 
> in the last 20 minutes before the QSO. S&P QSOs are determined as QSOs that 
> were on different frequency compared to previous and next QSO. That means I 
> could only do it with logs that had exact frequencies of QSOs.
> Let's look at CU2A, RD3A, ES5RR and OH8X (latter being out of top 10 but in 
> our region)
> CU2A worked 134 S&P QSOs and 116 of those were new multipliers.
> RD3A worked 515 S&P QSOs and 209 of those were new multipliers.
> ES5RR worked 470 S&P QSOs and 166 of those were new multipliers.
> OH8X worked 558 S&P QSOs and 249 of those were new multipliers.
> Now lets look at how big precentage of the worked multipliers had a recent 
> cluster spot on that frequency and I separate here the periods into 48 hours, 
> last 24 hours of the contest and last 12 hours of the contest.
> CU2A
> all 48h: 38.8% (38.8% of the mults CU2A worked in the contest as Search and 
> Pounce QSOs had been spotted on that frequency within 20 minutes before the 
> QSO)
> last 24h: 37.5%
> last 12h: 43.5%
> RD3A:
> all 48h: 74.6%
> last 24h: 85.6%
> last 12h: 97.9%
> all 48h: 27.1%
> last 24h: 19.6%
> last 12h: 27.3%
> OH8X
> all 48h: 44.2%
> last 24h: 40.8%
> last 12h: 45.5%
> So RD3A worked 48 new multipliers in the last 12 hours of the contest and 47 
> (!!) of them were recently spotted (within 20 minutes). Out of the 209 mults 
> that he worked in the contest 156 were recently spotted. That is way more 
> than any average non-assisted station and is a definite sign of using packet 
> assistance!
> It is logical that by the end of the contest operator gets more tired and 
> does not hide cheating any more and starts to jump from spot to spot.
> Also, RD3A is using just one radio. No SO2R - he is S&Ping with one radio 
> between CQ-s. And even though he has by far the best multiplier count of all 
> the SOAB stations!
> I have more proof for that from his log if necessary and I am very sure in 
> this.
> What do you think people of that? I say that he is really lucky that he was 
> not disqualified from CQWW 2006 but I am sure it will happen sooner or later. 
> We have seen those outrageous mult totals in other contests and unfortunately 
> after looking at this log it all became clear.
> Maybe RD3A wants to explain why he forgot to claim ASSISTED?
> 73
> tonno
> es5tv
> p.s. after this letter I was asked if 20 minutes is a good criteria and I 
> took out statistics about 5 minutes also (altough cheaters tend to wait 5-10 
> minutes at least to hit a spot) and I accompanied it also with statistics 
> about moving mults which are quite selfevident:
> ****
> TV> Anyway, 5 minutes stats are still quite convincing:
> TV> all 48h: 10.8%
> TV> last 24h: 7.1%
> TV> last 12h: 13.6%
> TV> RD3A
> TV> all 48h: 33.0%
> TV> last 24h: 39.4%
> TV> last 12h: 41.7%
> TV> 73
> ****
> Guess how many mults did RD3A get with asked QSYs! 0 (ZERO!!) 
> QSYing mults in CQWW CW 2006:
> RD3A: 0 
> ES5RR: 18 
> CU2A: 40 
> 73 
> es5tv
CQ-Contest mailing list

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