John,
Here is my take on self spotting. On CW you have a perfectly fair situation.
If you can generate a signal that can be heard by a Skimmer station you will be
spotted automatically by the RBN. There is no reason for your friends to spot
you or for you to spot yourself. It will have minimal to no impact unless you
don’t have a signal picked up by any Skimmer stations.
On SSB, without self- spotting, you have an unfair situation where the
difference between winning and losing could be the difference in how many of
your friends spot you versus how many of your competitors’ friends spot them.
It would be totally unfair for a station to win a contest because he was in a
big club with several members spotting him regularly while the better operator
at the better station lost because he didn’t have that support. Self spotting
on SSB levels the playing field to a great extent just like the RBN does on CW.
73…Stan, K5GO
> On Mar 9, 2023, at 7:49 AM, K3TN via CQ-Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> wrote:
>
> Self spotting obviously did not ruin the ARRL SSB, and it is definitely one
> now legal way to increase score. But, it just doesn't feel right. Below is
> what I sent to Bob W5OV in the ARRL contest forum and directly to the CAC.
> Context: Bud AA3B both independently put in similar but slightly different
> feature requests to the N1MM Logger+ team to support comment field labeling
> of self spots. Bud's implemented - you can now include text in your self
> spot, Bud suggested "QRV" and a few were doing that. Bud's goal was to make
> finding self spots more easily. The version pushed out before the ARRL DX SSB
> includes Bud's suggestion.
> Mine was rejected - I wanted a default value put in the text field so I could
> choose to filter out self-spots. Right now the AR cluster syntax doesn't
> support doing so. That would hurt me more than it would hurt any self
> spotter, but, like not using history files, it is what I'd like to do.
> I'm going to check to see if there has been a feature request turn Spot All
> S&P Qs by default, which I think is a much better solution.
> 73 John K3TN
>
> Hi, Bob - I feel like self spotting goes against the values we've had in
> contesting and contesting rules for many years.
>
> In the past there have been little things, like MultiMulti ops not being
> allowed to go home and work the MM from home. That was never going to swing
> the results but it represented a value that QSOs should be made the right
> way, kinda like fishing in a barrel is not an acceptable norm in fishing.
>
> I sent in comments that I was against it in HF non-SSB contests where we
> already have skimmers doing a fine job of spotting stations large and small.
> I'm not a big VHF contester so don't think my opinion shouldn't count there
> - but I feel the same way there! Contesting and skeds to me should not go
> together, nor should self-spotting.
>
> The rules changed, so be it. I'd like a way in CW and RTTY contest for me to
> not participate. I doubt that is a meaningful punishment to anyone but me,
> and it let's me maintain my values. The other way would be for me to only
> look at skimmer spots, which would punish me a bit more!
>
> I would have much, much, much rather see the CAC and members talk with the
> contesting community to think of ways rules could be changed to encourage
> more spotting in SSB contests - that is the real issue that was trying to be
> addressed, since there is no shortage of spots in CW and RTTY tests.
>
> A feature request to N1MM to make the "Spot every S&P QSO" the default would
> have been a simple step. The ARRL using RBN stats after the contest to have
> "Top 10 Human Spotter" listings in the results, maybe even offer $20 coffee
> cups to the top spotters, etc. Many other ways to get more spots in SSB tests.
>
> I've been a fan of leaping on most technology changes that have caused
> controversy, like FT8 and remote operating. But to me this (and history files
> that I choose not to use) are like post contest log manipulation. A norm that
> I'd like to see N1MM Logger+ enable choice in, just the way Logger+ was
> changed years ago to make post-contest log manipulation harder (not
> impossible!).
>
> 73 John K3TN
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|