Hi Martin and Frank,
I really appreciate different opinions, and will answers you as simple
as possible.
I do not thing that difference Unassisted vs Assisted is step forward in
contesting. It is just a right valuating of those two categories, *when
we are disusing WRTC qualifications*, event which is example of pure
unassisted operation. This is a point.
You are mixing two different issues - categories and cheating with
packet cluster.
Cheating is separate issue and does not have anything with proposals
regarding Unassisted vs Assisted. With equating those category (and
those two operations are simply very different - assisted will produce
much higher scores, so they are incomparable) you will just virtually
solve one problem, but impact will create worse situation. I see it as
good intention, understand the point, but tool/solution you propose is
wrong.
Frank said:
"Improvement and advancing technology has always been an important part
in Ham Radio, as well as true sportsmanship for contests, especially in
WRTC."
I agree 120%
Unlikely, we had and will have probably next WRTC without enough rooms
for showing newest technological ideas. In Boston all was forbidden.
Personally, I would like to see the rules like - One signal per time and
you do whatever you can/like/want. It could be a really big step
forward. We will see what DL guys will decide about WRTC competition rules?
Again, Unass vs ASS is just a right valuating of those two categories,
*when we are disusing WRTC qualifications, *not contesting in generally*
*73
Ranko*
*
On 12/19/2014 4:51 PM, Martin , LU5DX wrote:
Dear Ranko,
Some of us have explained and given our reasons as to why we don't
think this change is a step forward.
So far, those who believe this is a step forward, mainly state their
reason why being: Single ops can continue to enter as single ops
without DX assistance.
Is that the reason why you think this change is a step forward too?
The right adjudication of the results and eliminating one of the most
undetectables ways of cheating doesn't cout at all to you (and others
who think likewise)?
I would really like to hear your analysis about this "big step
forward" and how it contributes to making contesting a better "sport".
Thanks in advance.
Vy 73,
Martin, LU5DX
On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 8:58 AM, 4O3A <4o3a@t-com.me
<mailto:4o3a@t-com.me>> wrote:
Dear Chris,
nice that you consider our opinions.
Intention is not to criticize. On the contrary, we all want to
help you to make rules to be as good as possible, and I am sure -
it is our common interest.
Organizers should take advantage of our
observations/opinions/suggestions and to correct them all. You
made one important step forward, and should do your the best to
have rules really good ones.
73
Ranko
On 12/18/2014 3:29 PM, Christian Janssen DL1MGB wrote:
Hello,
after reviewing the discussions and the criticism we received
from contesters worldwide, we had an internal discussion and
decided the following changes.
We will split the Single Operator categories into Unassisted
and Assisted. Unassisted Single Operators will still have a
weighting factor of 1.0. Assisted Single Operators weighting
factor will be changed to 0.9. The reduced weighting factor
accomodates the fact that there will be no assisted operation
during the WRTC competition in 2018.
All other rules stay unchanged and are final. Please
understand that further changes of the qualifying rules would
have a deep impact on the balance of the rules requiring the
re-design of the entire rule system from scratch.
The latest version of the qualifying rules can be downloaded
at http://www.wrtc2018.de.
Good luck to all qualifiers! Nearly two months to go!
73s Chris DL1MGB
President WRTC2018 Organizing Committee
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com <mailto:CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
Version: 2014.0.4794 / Virus Database: 4235/8757 - Release
Date: 12/18/14
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com <mailto:CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
Version: 2014.0.4794 / Virus Database: 4253/8766 - Release Date: 12/19/14
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|