[Top] [All Lists]

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

To: n2ic@arrl.net, cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] cheating with packet - RD3A case
From: Jimk8mr@aol.com
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 21:49:38 EST
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
I agree that this was an excellent piece of work by ES5TV.
RD3AF may be, as Tonno says, a well known packet cheater in Europe, but  that 
reputation had not previously made it to the USA. This is a good example of  
why, as I suggested a few days back, the logs should be made public not  long 
after the log deadline. Subjecting the logs of those suspected of  breaking 
the rules to an analysis such as was done here, and presenting that  analysis 
the official log checkers, is a lot more likely to result in action  against 
the cheaters, particularly those who are not at the very top of the  claimed 
It is much easier for an adjudicator to DQ a log before the final results  
are released than it is to do so afterward.
73  -  Jim  K8MR
In a message dated 12/11/2007 8:31:45 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
n2icarrl@gmail.com writes:

Excellent analysis, Tonno !

Questions for the rest of  you:

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

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

It is most disappointing that this kind of  analysis is not being applied to 
SOAB-claimed logs by the contest  adjudicators. In the 2006 CQWW CW results, 
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, 
have detected and  questioned his error.

Steve,  N2IC

**************************************See AOL's top rated recipes 
CQ-Contest mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: [CQ-Contest] cheating with packet - RD3A case, Jimk8mr <=