[Top] [All Lists]

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

To: CQ CONTEST <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] List of WRTC stations / Results /Overspotting and future WRTCs
From: "Martin Monsalvo, LU5DX" <lu5dx@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 18:51:42 -0700 (PDT)
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Howdy guys..
Impossible to know what could have being under the scenario Paul suggested.
But well, the spots analysis I made is indeed very selective. It's restricted 
spots made of  WRTC stations.
And some of the tables show only the top 20 spotters activity.
Anyway the raw data is there is further analysis wants to be performed.
Now, if you dig deeper into the data you will find several other type of 
spotters. Like a last hour cheerleader: UA2FZ spotting only one station four 
You can do your own analysis taking a look at the tab Top 5 Who Spotted Who by 
hour. http://www.5bits.net/lu5dx/2010-wrtc-spots-analysis/
No one wants to take the credit away from nobody. I believe everyone in the top 
ten are out of this world top notch ops. All the  ops in a  WRTC are actually 
great ops.
What the story could have been is just a matter of uncertainty. And precisely, 
uncertainty is something that does not favor  a competition like WRTC. 

I believe we all agree this is an exercise for the future, if we cannot learn 
from our experiences, then it all would be really boring and at some point non 
Shutting down the packet clusters is contradictory to promoting the 
participation. Having WRTC stations auto-spot themselves does not solve the 
problem either.
Imagine a given hour, in a given geographical area, where all the teams are 
spotted at regular intervals, friends of some distant team (in this case Ws) 
will not be able to contact their friends because of the lack of propagation 
favoring that path whilst teams of the region WRTC is taking place will have 
tons of home boys calling…..
The main problem behind over-spotting, cheerleading via any means, is in fact 
that teams do not remain anonymous throughout the contest.
To me there are three possible solutions to this:
1)      Make WRTC a CW only contest with the same set of pre-programmed 
for everyone (though I’m mostly a CW lid) I wouldn’t like a CW only WRTC.
2)      Make WRTC a sprint type competition (I really like this one). It would 
make operation so much more fun, even with two stations being able to transmit, 
like in 2010 WRTC.
3)      Provide Teams a set of pre-recorded voice messages, for exchanges, CQs, 
TUs, QRZs, Repeats, and for individual letters, plus the same set of standard 
messages for CW.
Whichever of the three above mentioned  approaches should eliminate the 
possibility of a team being identified by friends,  in the end, that’s what 
thread is all about.
Please don’t mix things like the organization of WRTC 2010 by our Russian 
Friends in this topic. This has been the most amazing WRTC ever, and not 
the previous ones were not, but this simply was far beyond the rest  in terms 
providing the most leveled playing field ever in the history of ham radio 
contesting. I don’t think anyone of us have enough ways to express our 
to them. And precisely, any factor disrupting or diminishing the efforts made 
and care taken by the organizers to make things equal to every team or even 
making people question themselves what would have been if that did not happen 
all  must be reviewed for the future.
Harry today even confirmed that logs will be made public once the deadline for 
IARU logs is reached.
I mean everything is just perfect from the organization perspective.
Let’s brainstorm together about making WRTC even better for the future. 
In my case been to two WRTCs though I was invited to four. I could not attend 
1996 and 2000. But always felt a great deal of passion towards this event. THE 
EVENT of ham radio contesting.
Three things must be taken into account when it comes to selecting the next 
location and if an even greater experience is a goal:
        * The ability by organizers to provide stations exactly the same set up 
like in 
        * The ability by organizers to provide a delimited area of the same 
characteristics.(aka Flat terrain far enough from big cities)
        * The ability to eliminate ops identification behind a WRTC callsign.

I’m now generating reports on the signal strength of each WRTC station across 
the Reverse Beacon Network. You will not be surprised to see that the amazing 
job made by the organizing committee, field volunteers and everyone at 2010 
WRTC, because their objective of giving the Teams equal antena set up and equal 
topographic locations is reflected in those numbers too.
Vy best 73
Martin, LU5DX


S56A s56a at bit.si 
Thu Jul 15 10:51:31 PDT 2010
        * Previous message: [CQ-Contest] WRTC 2010
        * Next message: [CQ-Contest] SNS Tonight
        * Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
EI5DI wrote: Does anyone believe that, had these spotting figures been  
reversed, ES5TV and ES2RR would not be in first place?  LU5DX statistics are 
very selective.  K1TTT gives broader view.  Cheerleading this time had two 
facets: HQ and WRTC. S53MM three SSB spots  identifying R39D are inexcuseable 
but he also made ton of others.  S54A and  S54O were amongst the most active 
overall spoters.  RU1A winning team has a  long history of top WRTC scores and 
would not attach such a weight to 14%  more DXC spots.  Estonians had WRTC 
callsign R33A partly explaining  SSB top score! Kudos to USA WWYC largest CW 
run.  LP MMM S56A  Disclaimer:  I am not at speaking terms with S50A and S53MM. 

CQ-Contest mailing list
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>