CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Survey

To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Survey
From: "Edward Sawyer" <SawyerEd@Earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 20:01:22 -0400
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
I would like to comment on a couple of points made.

 

1)      WPX is NOT CQWW relative to this issue.  Anyone chasing spots in WPX
is losing before they start, so of course WC1M could care less if the
categories are merged.  CQWW - ARRL DX - and IARU are entirely different
matters.  K4XS proved that quite nicely in beating my unassisted Low Power
score with about 100 more mults running assisted.  The true competitor would
be forced to add it to the arsenal to still be able to have a chance to top
heavily.

2)      I was one of the top scores listed in the CQ WW 2012 SOAB LP
Unassisted list provided in this forum.  I run stacked yagis, SO2R, and
every ounce of the 100W provided (with very low loss feed lines going to the
yagis).  Until K4XS recent entry, I don't recall ANYONE entering SOAB LP USA
Assisted going ALL IN in CQWW to compete.  I am defining ALL IN as at least
a tower based antenna system, SO2R, and 38 hours in the chair.  If someone
has, speak up and tell us about it and decisions to do so in assisted.  Why
would we take 10 years of "decisions" and decide its time for a change?
Does this community feel that many of us are cheating and really should be
claiming assisted?

3)      Adding packet spotting to combined categories is going to do nothing
to attract even one non-contester who is hooked on on-line gaming to our
sport.  Its still slow, boring, etc regardless of whether packet spots are
appearing on your screen.  Running at 200+ per hour.now THAT has a chance of
turning their head.  Don't think so?  Try it and see the reaction.then have
them clear a band map of spots.you be the judge.

 

The answer to all this seems quite simple to me.  Just require that in order
to be in a top 10 box or a top 5 of some smaller categories, you have to
sign a waiver accepting that the contest has done the best it can and is
constantly seeking new ways to improve fairness but they can't assure that
every final score did not have some issue.  Combine that with requiring live
recording of the contest for this group and you have done a pretty darned
good job of killing this issue.

 

Think about the recording being available if asked .  How could you possibly
fake that you didn't hear the station earlier and band map it (which I do
all the time) as you clear some band map spots vs mults are just appearing
out of nowhere and your frequency jumped around.  I have not figured out how
you could fake that recording.  Also, the changing calls is killed more
because its clear what you heard on the recording.  If not enough of the
competitive unassisted ops want to comply, then kill the category.  No
argument anymore about internet connections.just either adding to the burden
of the set up or deciding to either go assisted or just do it for fun that
time.

 

Why does this concern have to be turned into spoiling the game for literally
ALL of the competitive ops in this contest in the USA LP category and a
clearly vast majority of the USA HP category?  A wise man said - don't kill
a fly with a cannon when a fly swatter will do.

 

Ed  N1UR/NV1N

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

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