CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Spots and Success in the WRTC - a little data for discu

To: n2ic@arrl.net
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Spots and Success in the WRTC - a little data for discussion
From: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>
Reply-to: n4zr@contesting.com
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2010 10:46:54 -0400
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
One likely explanation, which Steve and a couple of others have posited, 
is that Skimmer doesn't "like" significant change in speed between CQ, 
TEST or QRZ and the callsign - my guess is that it thinks the faster or 
slower characters are coming from someone else, who just happened to get 
on frequency within 50 Hz.  Perhaps unless/until Alex finds a way to 
improve that, it will be an incentive for people not to indulge in this 
ridiculous practice of speed shifting within a CQ, or, indeed, anywhere 
in a contest QSO

73, Pete N4ZR

The World Contest Station Database, updated daily at www.conteststations.com
The Reverse Beacon Network at http://reversebeacon.net, blog at 
reversebeacon.blogspot.com,
spots at telnet.reversebeacon.net, port 7000


On 7/19/2010 9:13 AM, Steve London wrote:
> A question that I have is...what were R32K, R31X, R36O, R34D, R37P, R39A and
> R39R doing differently that caused them to be infrequently picked up by a 
> skimmer ?
>
> On the suggestion of my teammate, N6TV, our CQ was "TEST R39M R39M". All
> characters were sent at the same speed - usually at 36 or 38 WPM. That seems 
> to
> have resulted in the 6th highest skimmer capture rate.
>
> 73,
> Steve, N2IC
>
> Pete Smith wrote:
>    
>> The following table lists the contestants in WRTC by finish order and
>> callsign, and then shows the number of spots recorded in the Reverse
>> Beacon Network database.  Reverse beacons don't cheerlead or select
>> which stations to spot.  You can draw your own conclusions.  Perhaps
>> there is a statistician among us who can derive further enlightenment by
>> analyzing these numbers, together with others released by the organizers.
>>
>> Call         Place    Spots
>> R32F         1       182
>> R33A         2       109
>> R33M         3       316
>> R39D         4       172
>> R34P         5       156
>> R32K         6       0
>> R32R         7       106
>> R31X         8       21
>> R37M         9       189
>> R36C         10      166
>> R33L         11      132
>> R38F         12      232
>> R33G         13      163
>> R31U         14      62
>> R34O         15      122
>> R36Y         16      59
>> R34W         17      197
>> R39M         18      222
>> R32C         19      115
>> R37L         20      139
>> R37Q         21      247
>> R34C         22      184
>> R36O         23      17
>> R38O         24      116
>> R31A         25      302
>> R36F         26      41
>> R38K         27      187
>> R38X         28      79
>> R31D         29      111
>> R34D         30      14
>> R32Z         31      252
>> R32O         32      111
>> R37A         33      184
>> R32W         34      142
>> R31N         35      140
>> R36Z         36      100
>> R38N         37      50
>> R36K         38      91
>> R38W         39      79
>> R37P         40      10
>> R39A         41      25
>> R37U         42      191
>> R34X         43      76
>> R39R         44      12
>> R34Z         45      133
>> R33U         46      96
>> R36W         47      152
>> R33Q         48      85
>>
>>
>> When I first saw this, I questioned how it was possible that a station
>> could finish sixth and yet not be spotted even once, but the scientist
>> on our team tells me it is not only possible, but statistically likely.
>> In any case, that's what the database says.
>>
>>      
> _______________________________________________
> 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

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