Scott:
While I agree with you whole-heartedly think of the consequences to this
reflector. It might have to revert to meaningful discussions about
contesting instead of mindless/mindnumbing drivel about a subject that no
one has or will ever have any control over. You would put K1TTTTTT right out
of business.
All seriousness aside whether we like it or not packet is here to stay and
eventually, probably not in our lifetime, the ARRL and CQ will realize using
packet is not as big a deal as guys like TTTTTTTT try to make it out to be
and they will drop the ass/isted category.
I missed working you this weekend, guess I should have used packet then I
would 8 VE1's instead of 7.
73
MAL N7MAL
BULLHEAD CITY, AZ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Nichols" <snichols@mvosprey.com>
To: <CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 16:41
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Packet statistics
Interesting to read the annual hubbub about packet in CW SS...
Some stats:
2004 SS CW - Claimed Scored to Nov 9/04:
Prec B - Avg score of top 30 stations - 198,120 with 27 of 30 achieving
sweeps
Prec U - Avg score of top 30 stations - 141,151 with 25 of 30 achieving
sweeps
2003 SS CW - Official Results:
Prec B - Avg score of top 10 - 215,552
Prec U - Avg score of top 10 - 172,820
2002 SS CW - Official Results:
Prec B - Avg score of top 10 - 219,552 with 10 sweeps
Prec U - Avg score of top 10 - 176,499 with 9 sweeps
SS CW All Time Divisional Records:
Prec B - Avg score of 16 Divisional all-time records - 220,296
Prec U - Avg score of 16 Divisional all-time records - 168,026
Now, I'm no statistician, and I'm sure there are 5,000 other factors to
consider in evaluating the above, but it appears to me that "B" top scores
consistently are ahead of "U" top scores, at least in CW
Sweepstakes...Does this not seem to indicate that packet provides no big
advantage in achieving a top score ? I'd like to do the same type of
analysis for CQWW...Might be a different story in a contest with many,
many mults...
I personally think the Europeans have it right by allowing packet in all
categories in most of their contests...Eliminates the packet class
cheaters...If you think it helps, connect and use it...If you think its a
waste of time, don't use it...At least the playing field is even...It's
become a fixture in radiosport...Lets face it....If you want to WIN, you
have to run, run, run and get Q's...Most of the mults will come to you
anyway...Using packet adds an element of fun for those of us who like to
do DXCC on 3 bands in CQWW, or are fascinated at being able to click on a
callsign on a screen and instantly be in the middle of a nice juicy pileup
etc etc...Same as SO2R adds an element of fun for those guys...No seperate
SO2R class yet, but much bigger advantage in my opinion...
One thing I will comment on, last weekend in CW SS, I could tell when I
was spotted by the sudden flurry of stations calling me after a
lull...Interestingly, many of them were giving me B's, A's or Q's...These
are the ones I consider packet class cheaters...
73, and CU in all of the next 4 or 5 weekends...Gotta love this time of
year...
Scott VE1OP
_______________________________________________
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
|