CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Software Column in NCJ - Need Ideas

To: Randy Thompson <k5zd@outlook.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Software Column in NCJ - Need Ideas
From: Stan Stockton <wa5rtg@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2022 20:11:38 -0500
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
It is interesting and worth a try but I think not as much fun, particularly on 
160m.  I envision a pileup on a DX station listening to either or both for an 
extended length of time trying to copy a complicated exchange.  That was 
typical years ago when the CQ 160 Contest required just a serial number to be 
sent by the DX station.

73… Stan, K5GO

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 16, 2022, at 4:39 PM, Randy Thompson <k5zd@outlook.com> wrote:
> 
> Launching a new contest is a difficult thing.  It's like throwing a party.  
> You have to hope enough people show up to make it so fun they want to do it 
> again.
> 
> One reason the WW is so popular is that it is easy, has lots of activity, and 
> has some great dates on the calendar. It provides a good mix of top level 
> competition with fun for everyone. It was also one of the first.
> 
> A random exchange contest would be interesting to the hard core competitor 
> class, but maybe not so fun for a guy who is just tuning the bands and 
> wanting to see if he can work a new country.  It requires special software 
> and participants who really want to see who can copy the best.
> 
> There was a 2 hour contest called the Internet Sprint about 20+ years ago 
> where the exchange for each QSO was the name you received from the previous 
> QSO.  Not random, but entertaining as you could hear various names get 
> mangled or burn out.  The idea of using a random number generated by the 
> logging software is an innovative suggestion.
> 
> Success would require running some proof of concepts first.  Both to test the 
> logging software but also to find the balance for scoring and activity.  A 4 
> hour event run when there is best propagation into the areas of the world 
> with lots of participants would be a good test bed.  That concentrates the 
> activity.  
> 
> It is also really hard to copy random information for hours at a time so 4 
> hours is probably about all most could take in the beginning. As Franki 
> pointed out, the RAEM contest has an unusual exchange that requires some 
> thought getting the location on the first QSO.  I find the challenge 
> interesting, but I am sure many would not.  
> 
> A short time also makes it easier to find a slot of the calendar. CWops has 
> demonstrated that weekday contests can find activity.  
> 
> There have been groups working on real-time logging (which is another level 
> of modernization), but it takes time and is hard. Has not shown visible 
> progress (yet).
> 
> Maybe someone will step forward, make some rules, promote the event, and then 
> we can see if people will respond.  Kind of like inviting people to a party...
> 
> Randy K5ZD
> 
> PS - To avoid needing software to be modified, maybe come up with a manual 
> process for doing the randomization.  E.g., last exchange received, qso 
> number x2, etc. That way even someone without the special software could 
> participate.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest <cq-contest-bounces+k5zd=outlook.com@contesting.com> On 
> Behalf Of Paul O'Kane
> Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2022 3:20 PM
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Software Column in NCJ - Need Ideas
> 
>> On 12/01/2022 15:55, Pete Smith N4ZR wrote:
>> 
>> Do you have specific software packages, or kinds of software, that 
>> you'd like to see written about in NCJ? How about subjects *about* 
>> software, and the influence of software on contesting?  One topic I'm 
>> thinking about is call history files
> 
> Call history files have contributed to the dumbing-down of contesting over 
> the last 30 years or so.  It seems to me that there is little or no point in 
> having on-air exchange elements that are known and pre-filled - CQ WW being 
> the prime example.  And, no, I'm under no illusions - CQ WW will not change.
> 
> The issue with fixed exchange elements is just that - they are fixed for the 
> duration of the contest. They include, apart from the ubiquitous 59(9), 
> zones, states, counties, districts, locators, IOTA references, and so on.  If 
> you don't copy them the first time you'll probably get or hear them later.  
> Even if you don't, there are plenty of online resources that have the 
> information, including licensing databases and QRZ.com.  And, yes, I know 
> these are all against the rules.
> 
> There is one exchange element that forces operators to copy it, and get it 
> right, before logging the QSO - one that is impossible to deduce later 
> without collusion with other operators concerned.  In 2017 the UK/EI Contest 
> Club (ukeicc.com) ran a "random number" contest, as proof of concept.  The 
> "new" number to be sent in each QSO was displayed by the logging software, 
> but the number received could not be predicted, and had to be copied.
> 
> The exchange (the number sent) was a pseudo-random number - with 4 digits 
> (always 4 digits, no leading zeros) between 1000 and 9999.  This number was a 
> repeatable combination of the previous call logged and the previous number 
> sent.  Being repeatable lets the adjudication software identify 
> responsibility for errors or discrepancies between logs.
> 
> The received number has to be copied and logged in real-time. Unlike serials, 
> it is not possible to guess/generate it by listening to subsequent QSOs.  
> Without collusion (seeing other logs), an incorrect received number could not 
> be "corrected".
> 
> The concept worked, but was limited by the fact that it was not supported by 
> N1MM+.  Any appropriate algorithm will work but, for it to be accepted, the 
> N1MM+ crew would have to lead the way.  The other contest loggers would soon 
> follow.  Note that knowledge of exactly how the "random number" calculation 
> is done will not help anyone who didn't copy it on air.
> 
> Here's what a "random-number" contest QSO might look like
> 
> ei5di:   EI5DI TEST
> 
> k1ki:    K1KI
> 
> ei5di:   K1KI 3906
> 
> k1ki:    7044
> 
> ei5di:   TU EI5DI
> 
> If you would more information, or to see it in operation, please contact me 
> directly (pokane@ei5di.com), not via this mailing list.  I can demonstrate it 
> on TeamViewer or Zoom.
> 
> How about it - who will get the ball rolling?
> 
> 73,
> Paul EI5DI
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.contesting.com%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fcq-contest&amp;data=04%7C01%7C%7C25906b710b2042449ad708d9d87af401%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637778844863926436%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&amp;sdata=9cHj9SIMaUqclDEXux1T44c546XGRqB6AN7wmnXsRT4%3D&amp;reserved=0
> _______________________________________________
> 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>