That sure isn't what it says in
http://cqww.com/blog/cqww-2016-ssb-self-spotting-and-entrant-audio-recordings/
Audio Recordings: Any single operator entrant (see V.A.1) competing for
a top three finish at the (a) World, (b) Continent, or (c) USA levels,
must record the transmitted and received audio as heard by the operator
for the duration of the contest operation.
So if you were #1 in Asia for 160m mono-band, low power, you should have
recorded your contest effort. This rule applies to all categories, not
just to single-op, all-band.
We sent out multiple requests for entrant audio recordings, as required
by the Rule shown above. Unfortunately, more than half of those
contacted were not able to comply.
Follow all of the rules, including XII.C [Audio Recording] and you be in
excellent shape.
---------------------------------------------
Just because one member of the CQWW triumvirate says "Your
interpretation is precisely correct" does not mean the other two members
agree, nor does it mean that any future member of the CQWW committee
will agree. All you can trust are the written rules, and, even they are
subject to interpretation and arbitrary abuse.
73,
Steve, N2IC
On 04/18/2017 07:54 PM, w5ov@w5ov.com wrote:
Yes, Mark;
Your interpretation is precisely correct.
73,
Bob W5OV
On Tue, April 18, 2017 7:48 pm, Mark wrote:
Hi Bob
If I may clarify your reply on this topic. Are you saying:
1. The Committee will only request audio recordings where they believe
an entrant has breached the rules. 2. In this instance where the Committee
asks for an audio recording and it is not supplied then they may DQ the
entrant. 3. Accordingly an entrant will never be asked to supply an audio
recording simply for the sake of it and then DQ'd solely because they
cannot do so.
If this is the case (and it sounds fair to me) can I suggest it goes in
the FAQs?
Thanks
Mark ZL3AB
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 12:39 PM, Dave Edmonds <dave@pkministrywebs.com>
wrote:
Bob,
Thanks for giving the participants more insight into what's happening
behind the 'closed doors' of the contest. I'm an admin for the SCQP and
I
can identify with your philosophy etc.
In early 2015, just coming off of the ARRL Centennial, I was working a
state QP. I read the rules and knew how to play the contest. After about
6
hours into the contest when it got very slow, I self-spotted on the
cluster. I knew the rules, but after self-spotting on and off during
the Centennial, it was almost a habit. A second after I pressed the
"Enter"
key, I realized that I broke the rules and bowed out of the contest with
a higher score than the ultimate winner. We've all been there... It was
a lesson learned. What good is winning if you didn't play it straight.
I've got a digital recorder hooked to the headphone jack of my IC-751
for recording purposes. My only problem is that battery life is short
and it's just one more thing to have to monitor during a contest..I'll
try to keep it going during the next WW or other major contest.
73s Dave WN4AFP
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 7:48 PM, <w5ov@w5ov.com> wrote:
Dave,
Seriously, in all of this, there is one way to avoid all of it. Do
not cheat. It is as simple as that. If you do not cheat it will not
be likely you will be asked for anything.
If you do cheat, with the proliferation of all kinds of data
available and SDR recordings on every continent, contest adjudicators
can determine what was going on very easily.
As has been seen this year, many more stations were caught and
disqualified than ever before. Last year was the same. The trend of
increasing disqualifications is likely to continue. If cheating is
still rampant, then disqualifications will increase. Maybe, the
higher likelihood of getting caught will reduce the number of those
who will cheat next year? I certainly hope so. It would be nice not
to have so many disqualifications.
Remember too, that MORE warnings were issued this year than there
were disqualifications! So, there could have been more DQs had the
evidence been more compelling.
The behavior of cheaters is that they apparently believe that it is
impossible to "prove" cheating. While if we use the same standards as
required in a court of law, we might not, but this is amateur radio
contesting and we have a team of experienced contesters looking at
all evidence available, and collectively, what is possible and what is
likely is taken into consideration. Allowing for people who don't
know better, or are beginners is also taken into account - if the
entrants are forthright and helpful in the analysis.
So, what do you do? Obey the rules. Do not cheat. You will likely
get caught. If you happen to win something, and do not cheat, great!
Those who won this year were not asked for recordings - because there
was no reason to ask them. Others, who were warned last year about
apparent cheating, and were explicitly told that if the behavior was
repeated, they would be asked for recordings. One or more did not
comply and their logs were converted to Checklogs as a result.
The CQWW committee does not want to do this. Any thought otherwise
is simply incorrect.
73,
Bob W5OV
CQWW Contest Committee
On Tue, April 18, 2017 1:10 pm, Dave Edmonds wrote:
Great comments... How about this scenario.....
I start working the contest without a recording knowing that I
would not be able to give it a 'competitive' effort due to the fact
that my wife
and
I
are attending a wedding on Saturday. We'll on Saturday morning I
receive a
call from the wedding party that the groom ran away with the maid
of honor and the wedding was canceled..Now I'm not going to the
wedding
and I
can devote my weekend to the contest.... Oooopppps... I can't be
competitive because I could win a top 3 spot in the USA and if I
win I could be DQ'ed.
What do I do?
A. Don't work the contest competitively (that's no fun).
B. Work the contest competitively and submit a check log (that's no
reward). C. Work the contest competitively, submit a log and bet on
the contest committee not requesting a recording. D. Blow off the
contest
and
find another wedding to attend.
Thoughts?
Dave@wn4afp.com
On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 9:10 PM, Mark <markzl3ab@gmail.com> wrote:
The CQ WW Committee blog post about audio recording is a bit of
surprise to me. Up until now I had figured audio recording would
only be an issue in Oceania for the serious entrants (i.e. entries
with lots of QSOs and/or hours on the air). In Oceania a casual
entry of 1-200
Qs
could easily put you in the top three of just about any single op
single
band category, assuming the category even had three entrants (I
won the Oceania CW 40m QRP
assisted category and set a new record with one QSO and two points
a
few
years back). In its post the committee quotes the Asian 160m low
power category. Looking at the 2016 SSB results there were no
entrants in that category (assuming there wasn't an entrant(s) who
was moved to
a
checklog for not audio recording) so any entry at all would have
won
it.
In Oceania
there was one entrant who made four QSOs.
I would pick most if not all ops who perceive themselves as
casual would not audio record their entry (or even know they had
to). Is it really the Committee's intention to DQ casual entrants
who end up in
the
top three due to a lack of other entrants, if they do not provide
an audio record? If so then I'd suggest the rules should be
amended to make it clear that any entry competitive or not which
ends up in the
top
three is subject to the audio recording requirement because
casual ops will not consider themselves competitive. It will of
course have the effect of decimating casual single category
entries in this part of world (such as it is) by ops who just
enter for fun but who do not want to run the risk of being
besmirched by a DQ. A better way (and it seems to me contesting is
heading this way in general) would be for entrants to be able to
enter any category they like but designate themselves as casual or
competitive. If casual then they would not need to provide an
audio record but could still be
listed
in the results database for their category (assuming they comply
with the other rules). However they would not eligible for a
certificate which would go to the highest competitive entries and
who of course would need to provide an audio record on request.
Also only
competitive
entries would be eligible to set records and to be listed in the
top entrant lists in the results write up. At least this way an
entrant
can
make a conscious decision as to how they want their entry to be
treated rather than run the risk of a DQ if they are unlucky
enough to enter a category with less than three other entrants.
73
Mark ZL3AB
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
--
Dave Edmonds
PK Ministry Webs
864.288.6678
dave@pkministrywebs.com www.pkministrywebs.com
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
--
Dave Edmonds
PK Ministry Webs
864.288.6678 <(864)%20288-6678>
dave@pkministrywebs.com www.pkministrywebs.com
_______________________________________________
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
|