[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] List of WRTC stations / Results /Overspotting, and its

To: cq-contest@contesting.com, David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] List of WRTC stations / Results /Overspotting, and its impact
From: John Geiger <aa5jg@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 17:15:03 -0700 (PDT)
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Or only allow the WRTC stations to operate search and pounce. That would sure 
be interesting.

73s John AA5JG

--- On Thu, 7/15/10, David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com> wrote:

> From: David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] List of WRTC stations / Results /Overspotting, and  
> its impact
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Date: Thursday, July 15, 2010, 1:06 PM
> I'm sympathetic to this issue and I found the per-game
> exhortations from 
> UA9BA to be distasteful, but I don't think that it is
> practical or even 
> desirable to try to filter WRTC spots.
> a.  I could easily get around any filter if I wanted
> to spot a 
> particular WRTC station.  Instead of R31A, I simply
> spot WR31A or 
> something like that.  The possibilities are endless
> and everyone would 
> know who I meant.
> b.  Lots of casual contesters enjoy chasing WRTC
> stations, either for 
> the certificate or local bragging rights, and the rules
> allow them to do 
> so if they submit in the M/S category (or don't submit at
> all).  Why 
> remove that capability for those casual participants while
> reducing the 
> available contacts for the WRTC teams as well?
> c.  As K1TTT points out, the various cluster networks
> are extensive, 
> impossibly intertwined, run on different software, and are
> each managed 
> by a different sysop (some of whom are no doubt totally
> unsympathetic to 
> leveling the field for WRTC teams anyway).  All it
> would take is one of 
> them to go rogue and then we would have a truly non-level
> playing field 
> because a smaller cluster network would be even less likely
> to capture 
> all 50 teams equally.
> If a solution to this is needed for the future, I would
> lean toward the 
> idea of having the organizers automatically spot all WRTC
> teams at some 
> fixed interval.  Doing so every fifteen minutes would
> generate enough 
> spots to pretty much swamp out any disparity in the number
> of spots from 
> other contesters, as well as capture the majority of
> propagation shifts.
> And yes, being the recipient of spots has it's downside,
> but I think the 
> number of contesters who would prefer not to be spotted at
> all is very, 
> very small.
> 73,
> Dave   AB7E
> On 7/15/2010 7:39 AM, Kelly Taylor wrote:
> > Paul's right: giving everybody fair playing conditions
> isn't the same as
> > rendering everyone equal.
> >
> > Is it not possible, just thinking out loud here, to
> request the DX Cluster
> > operators to kindly employ WRTC filters for the course
> of IARU?
> >
> > WRTC organizers could supply the clustermeisters a
> list of all callsigns (we
> > still wouldn't be disclosing who has which callsign in
> advance, since it's
> > all the callsigns in one group) in advance and request
> that all spots for
> > any of those calls be blocked. I'm sure it can't be
> overly complicated, but
> > if a clustermeister wants to set me straight on that,
> please do.
> >
> > Indeed, I think a 'do not spot' registry would be a
> wonderful thing for some
> > operators who AREN'T WRTC ops. I know first-hand and
> have heard from others
> > to corroborate, that sometimes, being spotted is NOT a
> good thing. Spotting
> > can easily drive a frequency to saturation, at which
> point that frequency
> > becomes unusable. In addition to the good operators,
> DXCluster drives a lot
> > of lids to a frequency, who then proceed to call
> without regard for whether
> > the spottee is transmitting or whether the spottee can
> even be heard.
> >
> > If I was going on a contest-pedition, I would probably
> pay US$100 for the
> > privilege of being unspottable. Particularly if I was
> at a station loud
> > enough to generate its own pileups without the
> assistance of DXCluster. Such
> > as the amazing station at 6y1v.
> >
> > 73, kelly
> > ve4xt
> _______________________________________________
> 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>