I am sooooo close to agreeing with this. Let's get back to one single op
category and have at it. If only it was that simple.
At the top of the standings, it wouldn't cause much of a change. The scores
for SO and SOA are pretty similar. The top guys in both categories are
winning on a combination of skill, station, and geography.
However, as you move down the listings, the advantage of packet really
starts to show up. Multipliers have a bigger impact in a 500 QSO log than
one with 3000 QSOs. So it would be unfair to the guys who don't have access
(or desire) to use Packet.
There are a lot of people who enjoy the satisfaction of doing things on
their own and not relying on the spoon feeding or distraction of packet. It
is a pretty good feeling to have more multipliers and a bigger score than
the guys that use packet.
The WAE contest allows packet for all competitors. The listings indicate if
a station claims no packet use. Seems to be a good compromise, but I know
there are many single ops who stopped participating because of this. So
there is risk of losing supporters for any contest that allows packet use.
For now, I continue to be in favor of separate categories for SO and
Assisted. Well, I am really in favor of eliminating packet, but that seems
to be impossible. :)
Would love to see more definition of terms in contest rules so that we had
more agreement on what is right and wrong. I doubt any of us have read all
the laws for our town, state, and country, yet we generally "know" what is
legal and what is not. Regardless of the text of the rules, same should be
true for contesting.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org
> [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of Jamie
> Dupree NS3T
> Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 7:14 PM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Get Rid of the Assisted Category
> We have had a pretty lively discussion in recent weeks on
> what really constitutes assistance and what does not. For
> some live scoreboards and propagation tools are bad. For
> others, the spotting networks cause too many problems. (I
> won't even get into directional CQ'ing.)
> So my thought is pretty simple - if you are a single op - you
> are a single op.
> No category for assisted or unassisted.
> How often have I read on this reflector on how the best
> unassisted ops will beat the best assisted ops almost every
> time. If that's the case, then we shouldn't worry about
> having an Assisted category....because those same unassisted
> guys will still prevail.
> I look at what's happening in terms of contest tools and
> software right now.
> The advances are integrating computer logging with
> propagation, spotting networks and more. Many are using
> instant messaging as well. The shack table is getting more
> and more crowded.
> When you get rid of the Assisted category, then the only
> thing you have to worry about on spots is self-spotting - and
> that can be detected as K1TTT has repeatedly shown. Spotting
> isn't going away, just like the internet isn't going away,
> just like hi-tech propagation tools aren't going away.
> Just a thought.
> 73 Jamie NS3T
> CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest mailing list