Yo Contesters - 5901, qrz, freq's in use, again again....
A few years ago a co-worker came out to the contest station
to see what HAM radio was all about. I told him it was a great
hobby where you get to buy stuff forever and then can tell other
hams what you bought. Also mentioned CONTESTING.....
Today Ed is N3HXQ and operated the WPX Phone contest as
S/O from his very own station in Maryland (Big Grin).
This morning I received this email from him and frankly I have no
answer. What would you say to a "new" guy in the hobby with
this question?
73 Rich KL7RA
>Hi Rich,
>
>It has been bothering me a little bit that the rules seem to be stacked
>against unassisted operation. My impression is that an assisted op can
>probably beat an unassisted op (the assisted op has more information
>right? when things get slow he can always just do some high yield
>multiplier hunting from spots). The problem seems to me to be that there
>is no incentive in the rules to be unassisted except personal
>satisfaction. You can't (generally speaking) tell if some one has
>cheated (but some seem to). Since you can get a higher score as
>assisted, the unassisted category is likely to whither away. If club
>contest results just add single op assisted and unassisted together
>unweighted, the incentive for club support is to go for the maximum
>score: assisted. It seems like people would have less and less incentive
>to be unassisted if they have to compete against cheaters in that
>category. Why not go to assisted and at least have a level playing
>field? Maybe this just a sign of the times and I should give up on
>unassisted operation, but I think it is fun. Is this something worth
>worrying about and if so, is there some way to fix the rules to make
>unassisted operation more viable? The current situation seems unstable
>and will lead to unassisted going away.
>
>Ed
>
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|