Ok, so you have no statistics, only a 'feeling' about coincidences in a very
small sample. And even your statements below are not an indication of a
problem.... consider the following to be a minimal analysis of your
statements.
Rate afterwards 1q/min, so in 10 minutes you make 10 qso's.
Rate in peak of spot 1.5 q/min, so in 10 minutes you make 15 qso's, or 5
extra qso's in 10 minutes.
> The majority
> of the stations contacted during the periods of increased activity
> submitted logs as single op. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to
no, you don't have to be a rocket scientist, but someone who can compute a
few statistics helps...
lets see, a 'majority' implies 'more than half'. So during that 10 minutes,
8 or more of the 15 qso's would have to be cheaters. But you only made 5
extra qso's by the rates you quote so 3 of the others who would have called
you anyway are also now cheaters in your mind.
You also fail to take into account the increase in activity due to the
increase in activity. This would further reduce the number of people who
called because they actually saw the dx spot. This effect works like
this... assume you were cq'ing with some dead air in between qso's. that
dead air gives time for someone doing s&p to tune past you and therefore not
call you. When you make a qso, especially in ss, you are on the air for a
longer period so someone tuning past you has more of a chance to hear you.
also when you aren't transmitting someone else is, adding to the activity on
the frequency. Because of this activity it is more likely that more s&p ops
tuning past you will stop and see if they need you and then be waiting to
call. So just getting 2 or 3 extra qso's from a single spot may be enough
to add a couple more qso's just from the extra activity on your frequency.
David Robbins K1TTT
e-mail: mailto:k1ttt@arrl.net
web: http://www.k1ttt.net
AR-Cluster node: 145.69MHz or telnet://dxc.k1ttt.net
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:cq-contest-
> bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of N7MAL
> Sent: Friday, October 14, 2005 05:33
> To: k1ttt@arrl.net; 'Cq-Contest Reflector'
> Cc: Ken Widelitz
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Domestic Contest Spots/Cheating
>
> Here is the maximum you are going to get from me. STOP asking for more
> because it's not going to happen under any circumstances.
> This is an excerpt from my log converted to an easy to read format(minus
> the calls). As is easily seen I'm plugging along at a rate of a contact
> every couple of minutes. I'm not a big gun (75w) and I'm comfortable
> giving out points at an easy rate. I was spotted at 0430 and my rate
> immediately jumps up to an average of 1.5 Q's per min and stays there a
> little over 10 mins. My rate then falls back down to a Q every min or so.
> (Remember the SS exchange is a long exchange)
> This activity level happened each of the times I was spotted. The majority
> of the stations contacted during the periods of increased activity
> submitted logs as single op. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to
> figure it out. Yes there probably was a coincidence, like K6LA, but only
> one or two since this pattern is not only repeatable but predictable. As
> long as the 'DX' Packet-Cluster system allows and condones and promotes
> spotting of domestic stations during domestic contests there is and will
> continue to be cheating. That is the reason categories like unlimited and
> assisted have been added to contests. Apparently they are not as glamorous
> as single op so guys continue to submit logs as single op even though they
> are using packet spots to find contacts.
>
> 041107 0419 80 CW
> 041107 0422 80 CW
> 041107 0423 80 CW
> 041107 0426 80 CW
> 041107 0429 80 CW
> 041107 0430 80 CW SPOTTED on DX PACKET-CLUSTER
> 041107 0431 80 CW
> 041107 0432 80 CW
> 041107 0433 80 CW
> 041107 0433 80 CW
> 041107 0434 80 CW
> 041107 0436 80 CW WORKED K6LA
> 041107 0436 80 CW
> 041107 0437 80 CW
> 041107 0438 80 CW
> 041107 0438 80 CW
> 041107 0439 80 CW
> 041107 0440 80 CW
> 041107 0441 80 CW
> 041107 0443 80 CW
> 041107 0444 80 CW
> 041107 0444 80 CW
> 041107 0445 80 CW
> 041107 0446 80 CW
> 041107 0448 80 CW
> 041107 0448 80 CW
> 041107 0449 80 CW
> 041107 0450 80 CW
> 041107 0451 80 CW
> 041107 0452 80 CW
> 041107 0453 80 CW
> 041107 0455 80 CW
>
>
>
> MAL N7MAL
> BULLHEAD CITY, AZ
> http://www.ctaz.com/~suzyq/N7mal.htm
> http://geocities.com/n7mal/
> Don't worry about the world coming to an end today.
> It's already tomorrow in Australia
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: David Robbins K1TTT
> To: 'Cq-Contest Reflector'
> Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 12:26
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Domestic Contest Spots/Cheating
>
>
>
> Come on mal, one contact does not a cheating pattern make... lets have
> some
> real data!
>
>
> David Robbins K1TTT
> e-mail: mailto:k1ttt@arrl.net
> web: http://www.k1ttt.net
> AR-Cluster node: 145.69MHz or telnet://dxc.k1ttt.net
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:cq-contest-
> > bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of N7MAL
> > Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 07:10
> > To: Ken Widelitz; Cq-Contest Reflector
> > Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Domestic Contest Spots/Cheating
> >
> > What an interesting posting Ken. In a single posting you validated
> what I
> > said about my participation in the contest and the fact that I had
> been
> > spotted several times on the cluster. You then proceeded to make the
> > majority of the rest of your posting about you and your effort.
> > Unfortunately and sadly, very sadly, Ken you managed to get some facts
> > mixed-up. Because you got your facts mixed-up I am going to show you,
> and
> > others, exactly how well I have last years SS documented.
> > N2IC Steve in New Mexico posted this information:
> > W6ZZZ 3563.1 N7MAL 0430 07
> Nov
> > 2004
> > It is a copy of a spot during the SS showing at 0430Z W6ZZZ spotted me
> on
> > my run freq.
> >
> > At 0436Z I worked K6LA on 3563, he sent me number 628 and I sent K6LA
> my
> > number 262.
> > Ken submitted his log as a 'B'(single op).
> > Ken in his own words claimed to have not worked me.
> > Yet he did work me and worked me a few minutes after I was spotted,
> what
> > an amazing set of coincidences...!!...(also the QSO is confirmed on
> LOTW)
> > I never did any S&P on 75m only a run freq.
> >
> > I'm not accusing Ken of anything. Ken has been around a long time and
> is
> > an excellent contester. He shows up in my master logbook 15 times in
> many
> > various and different contests since the year 2000. He doesn't need
> packet
> > spots to find and work me 300 miles away. OOOORRRR
> >
> > This is exactly why I won't publish names and
> > callsigns........................................
> >
> > MAL N7MAL
> > BULLHEAD CITY, AZ
> > http://www.ctaz.com/~suzyq/N7mal.htm
> > http://geocities.com/n7mal/
> > Don't worry about the world coming to an end today.
> > It's already tomorrow in Australia
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Ken Widelitz
> > To: Cq-Contest Reflector
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 1:57
> > Subject: [CQ-Contest] Domestic Contest Spots/Cheating
> >
> >
> > Mal, N7MAL, complained about being worked by stations in the single
> op
> > category after his station was spotted in SS & NAQP. In his post he
> > stated
> > "If it happened once, or maybe even twice, it might be coincidence
> but
> > over
> > several contests it is no longer coincidence but cheating."
> >
> >
> > While watching the Angels/White Sox game I compiled the following
> > statistics
> > from 2001 - 2005 regarding ALL of N7MAL's reported operations from
> the
> > ARRL
> > web site, the CQ-CONTEST 3830 archives and DX Summit:
> >
> > YEAR/Contest QSOs Spots
> >
> > 04 CW SS 477 5
> > 03 CW SS 309 3
> > 02 CW SS 367 3
> > 01 PH SS 77 0
> > 01 CW SS 220 0
> >
> > 05 CW NAQP 360 1
> > 04 CW NAQP 492 1
> >
> >
> > I would note the following:
> >
> > 1. In each contest I made considerably more QSOs and was spotted
> fewer
> > times. Why is this significant? Because, especially in SS, and
> > especially on
> > Sunday, "new blood" is much desired. I know I am constantly tuning
> the
> > 2nd
> > radio looking for "new blood." Every serious SS competitor is doing
> the
> > same
> > thing. Given, generally, in the last few years only 2 bands have
> > significant
> > activity, if you are SO2R, you are tuning just one band. You will
> find a
> > new
> > station relatively quickly without cheating.
> > 2. If I hear a pileup - or see one on the bandscope, it attracts my
> > attention, without the use of packet.
> > 3. There is a category of Unlimited in SS. That is a single op
> assisted
> > category. It is becoming more popular and those single ops DO get to
> > jump on
> > packet spots legally. Spots of "new blood" gets attention from this
> > category.
> > 4. The sample size of spots about which N7MAL is complaining is VERY
> > small.
> > However, given the small sample size, if the same single op station
> > worked
> > N7MAL in 2002, 2003 and 2004 within a few minutes of his being
> spotted,
> > it
> > would raise my eyebrows.
> > 5. In checking my own logs, I see I worked N7MAL in 2001 when he had
> > zero
> > spots. I didn't work N7MAL in 2002, 2003 or 2004. Guess I wasn't
> tuning
> > the
> > 2nd radio hard enough.
> >
> > 73, Ken, K6LA / VY2TT
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|