Trent,
I apparently didn't do a good job of explaining.
1. If you are saying that assisted rarely beats unassisted, I completely
agree.
So what?
Who cares?
What does it matter?
Are you saying the assistance does not case higher scores? If so, you are
wrong. If you are saying the majority of top operators don't want to compete
with Internet assistance, you are right.
2. I think if someone wants to operate without the internet telling them where
all the multipliers are located on the bands AND be able to compete with others
who are of like mind, they should be allowed to do so. If you say they "can"
compete based on the past results of the assisted class not being able to win
over the unassisted single operators, then you need to look no further than the
few instances of when the single assisted operators did beat the single
unassisted operators. You will likely find world class operators who
experimented with the assisted class.
3. Not in all cases, but in the vast majority of the results you will find
that the best operators do not choose the assisted category. I can assure with
100% certainty that if the categories were combined there would NEVER be a
winner who did not use the Internet.
4. Is there a good reason why you want to combine the categories? Is it to
create a situation where many people are unhappy because they are forced to use
the Internet to continue to compete at the top level? Is it so if someone
wants to activate a multiplier, let's say from the beach, that has no internet
access they are disadvantaged?
I could make as good an argument for combining the categories and eliminating
the use of the Internet for everyone during a contest as you can make for
combining and allowing the Internet. It is a radio contest, you know. It's
not a computer game of shooting fish in a barrel.
However, I'm not going to do that because there are many who enjoy using it and
can compete with others who also like it and I see no reason for taking away
their fun. Why not allow the original and historically most popular category's
operators the same enjoyment?
73... Stan
> On Jul 31, 2017, at 8:18 AM, Trent Sampson <vk4ts@outlook.com> wrote:
>
> Sorry Stan
>
> But the statistics do not support your biased view - Plain and simple - Troll
> through ALL the results and let us know how many times ASSISTED beat
> UNASSITED - the answer will highlight your biased response
>
> Cheers
>
> VK4TS
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stan Stockton [mailto:wa5rtg@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, 31 July 2017 11:11 PM
> To: Trent Sampson
> Cc: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Assisted - Is it just another Urban Myth ?
>
> Here we go again.
>
> The answer to your question has zero relevance on whether they should be
> combined.
>
> Do the results show being assisted is a detriment like QRP is a detriment as
> compared to low power. If so, it's like me saying that QRP scores don't beat
> low power scores so why not combine those categories.
>
> If anyone thinks that SO scores would not be as good if those top operators
> used the internet to provide them a list of multipliers to work, they have no
> clue. If a survey was taken of those who operate SO in serious fashion the
> result would be they don't want them combined.
>
> I have yet to see any logical reason to eliminate the category other than it
> is difficult to enforce the rules.
>
> 73... Stan, K5GO
>
>
>
> Sent from Stan's IPhone
>
>
>
>> On Jul 31, 2017, at 6:26 AM, Trent Sampson <vk4ts@outlook.com> wrote:
>>
>> The Assisted category in the CQWW is 25 years old this year;
>>
>> It was created because of the advantages" given to operators who were using
>> the spotter networks
>>
>> In all of the 25 years of assisted categories in the CQWW how many times has
>> the world SOAB (Assisted) beaten the SOAB (Unassisted) ? - It is a trick
>> question
>>
>> Based on factual information is there any reason to not combine the
>> categories ? before you answer look at the data...
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
|