Scott,
The thing you're overlooking is that *if you don't cheat*, you won't likely
be asked to produce any of the evidence mentioned in these rules tweaks nor
will you be subjected to having your log converted to a CHECKLOG.
The rule that applies to every entrant equally is: "Don't cheat, and you'll
have nothing to worry about".
Simple.
73,
Bob W5OV
-----Original Message-----
From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
w2lc@twcny.rr.com
Sent: Monday, June 01, 2015 11:22 PM
To: cq-contest@contesting.com; k5zd@charter.net
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Proposed Rules
Randy sorry for being dramatic, just trying to make a point.
I feel that the rules apply to everyone not just a few. The enforcement or
application will be for the high scores, which could come from anywhere. At
least theoretically. But rules are rules no one should ignore them.
I have recorded contests before with mixed success, not always with the best
audio quality. Difficult to maintain a steady level, since I am fussing with
the radio frequently.
I'm not sure if 75% showing frequencies is good or bad. Still 25% do not
show exact frequencies, that is still quite a few. 25% of 7657 CW entries is
about 1900 not showing exact frequencies. I was surprised that the number of
CW entries is that high!
85% meeting the log deadline sounds pretty good. Although 15 out of every
100 missing the deadline does not sound that good. That is a lot of late
logs. 7657 CW entries and about 1100 are late, that's a lot
I believe the best rules are ones that are uncomplicated, easily understood
and remembered. It is too bad that a few are making the rules get out of
hand (in my opinion).
Thanks for the statistics
73 Scott W2LC
---- Randy Thompson K5ZD <k5zd@charter.net> wrote:
> No reason to be dramatic about contest rules Scott.
>
> We are asking for actual frequencies from the top logs. This helps us
with
> the log checking. With 99.4% of all logs being submitted electronically,
> and more than 75% showing frequencies, we don't feel this is a big hurdle.
> Especially for the top scorers. If someone has a problem with recording
> frequencies, they are always able to contact the contest director and
> request an exemption.
>
> Recording is only for the top scoring single op entries. We aren't asking
> anyone to submit the recording files unless we ask for them. This means
> there are likely to be <5 entries per year where this will apply.
>
> The 5 day log deadline has been in place for 3 years now. See
> http://cqww.com/blog/when-do-logs-come-in/ We have over 85% of the logs
> received by the deadline.
>
> No one is disqualified for not following any of the new rules. Your log
may
> be listed as late or reclassified, but you don't start the contest already
> disqualified. This is supposed to be fun. :)
>
> Randy, K5ZD
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> > w2lc@twcny.rr.com
> > Sent: Monday, May 25, 2015 1:38 PM
> > To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> > Subject: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Proposed Rules
> >
> >
> > CQWW rules changes
> >
> > The Good
> > 1) SO non-assisted
> > 2) classic category
> > 3) club circle change - I may be able to join a real contest club now
> >
> > The Bad
> > 1) exact frequencies - non-compliance means you are a check log. "A
> > log without all required information may be reclassified to check log"
> > 2) no audio = DQ. "provide a complete recording of the contest
> > operation audio as heard by the operator. Failure to do so may result in
> > the entry being disqualified"
> > 3) 5 day log deadline
> >
> > So before I even turn on my radio I am either a check log and possibly
> > DQed, if I score well enough. With a serious effort I will be a check
log
> > at best. Gee thanks
> >
> > Questions I wish Randy would answer
> > 1) How many do not log exact frequencies? this can be derived from the
> > logs
> > 2) How many record the audio? Randy does this anyone else?
> > 3) How many miss the 5 day deadline?
> >
> > KE3X said "If you want to retain SOAB Unassisted and have results that
> > mean something, then logging the frequency for each QSO and recording
> > your effort is the price of admission".
> >
> > Be careful what you ask for. If these rules are implemented and
followed
> > here is what may happen
> >
> > No exact frequencies = check log exactly why I do not operate RDXC
> > No audio recording = DQ
> > Not everyone has the two capabilities mentioned above or wants to go
> > through the trouble.
> >
> > These two rules relegate 99% to the status of participant since they are
> > no longer considered a competitive entry (for not complying)
> >
> > Kind of like being a walker in the Boston marathon or a 5k
> >
> > I am actually training for a 5k, a lot of similarities to radio contests
> > various categories, wide variety of different people involved,
> > various levels of competitiveness
> >
> > But unlike radio contesting,
> > if I win my category I will not be a checklog because I used last year's
> > sneakers And I don't have to supply a video of my run
> >
> > The exact frequency and recording rules are punishing the many due to
the
> > cheating of a few. The contest committee may have won the battle but
may
> > be losing the war by declaring 99% to be ineligible before the contest
> > even starts.
> >
> > So Dink, how about I fly out to Seattle and you and I go out to dinner
on
> > November 28 and reminisce about the good old times. That seafood place
on
> > the waterfront looks good
> >
> > 73 Scott W2LC
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|