----- Original Message -----
From: "Tõnno Vähk" <Tonno.Vahk@gildbankers.com>
To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 1:18 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] cheating with packet
SN2B wins EU with ca 20% margin. My question is: WHY? Why is he cheating
with packet? I simply can't understand. Is the reason that he considers this
standard? I would really like to hear SP2FAX's explanations on this.
73
tonno
es5tv
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Tonno,
Did you find an answer from SP2FAX in your mail box waiting for you when
back home after VP6 DX'pedition? I guess, no.... But I was pointed that
SN2B/SO2R/SPA2FAX made his first step away from packet cheating already:
--------
2007 CQWW SSB List of Logs Received
Page created Sun Mar 9 12:00:01 UTC 2008 and updated hourly
SO2R SINGLE-OP ONE 160M HIGH NON-ASSISTED
2007 CQWW CW List of Logs Received
Page created Sun Mar 9 13:00:01 UTC 2008 and updated daily
SO2R SINGLE-OP ONE 80M HIGH ASSISTED
--------------------
Recently lot of discutions was going on the contesting reflector about CQ WW
Contest committee decision to open WW DX participants logs for the public
access. My opinion is clear - the committee made it's first right step
preventing cheating in radiosport. The next steps, like contest logs
publishing couple months after the dead line, the demand to have exact QSO
frequency written in the log for those pretending to join top ten/six
listings, even requirement to have an audio record of the participation
would be highly appreciated. I never do audio record myself, but it would be
easy to make it these days if contest rules would require it for the contest
winning pretendents, for those pretending to make top ten/six.
As I mentioned earlier there was bunch of stations cheating during CQ WW DX
2006 contests. It was easy to figure out those cases when exact frequency
was logged. I suspect this year part of them will avoid showing exact QRG in
their logs inspite they using CAT contrlos and proper logging software.
Sure, if contest Committee would open logs for the public access long time
before final results came out, it would be possible to reconstruct
suspicious logs for more careful checking.
Well, as you can see Kazik already made his first submition as ASSISTED.
Unfortunately, not every one is willing to make some conclusion. The very
bad example is my countryman LY2IJ. His 2006 logs analysis shows very
clearly He was one of those cheaters in both, CQ WW DX SSB and CW. We can
see He submitted his logs for the CQ WW DX 2007 CW
http://www.cqww.com/logs-received_cw.htm
LY2IJ SINGLE-OP ONE 160M HIGH NON-ASSISTED
and ssb
http://www.cqww.com/logs-received_ssb.htm
LY2IJ SINGLE-OP ONE 160M HIGH NON-ASSISTED
I really doubt the information showed above is true. Therefore it would be
nice to see his logs as ssoon as possible along withe UBN and NIL reports.
Actually, I do not see very big difference between people cheating in
Contests or steeling goods on the streets. In 2006 CQ WW DX contests SN2B,
LY2IJ, T96Q simply stoled Trophys from the people that really deserved them
by hard and honest work. They possibly put some people, who really deserved
the top six membership maybe for the first time in their lifes, in to very
deep disapointment, possibly preventing to stay them away from the
radiosport for the rest of radio activity?
By the way, it's a shame, but here in Lithuania We have one very well known
contestman, who is well known as a thief as well, who was at least FIVE
times now to the court because steeling goods from other people, including
sports delegation members, from the hotel rooms, from the sportstraining
centers. Inspite He was cought cheating in the contest (operating
simultaneously on two bands during WPX Contest some 8 years ago), He is one
of the top rankings from Eu#3 for the next WRTC. Funny? Perhaps yes for some
one, but not for me. I even remember our Lithuanian internet newspapers
quoted english saying in it's original language "one time a cheater - always
a cheater", when writing about that LY callsign holder.
Therefore in the future I'll be looking at the Contest achievements of some
well known callsign holders very cautiously.
Due some reasons last couple of weekends I stayed out of contest activity,
therefore found some spare time for more deep analysis of some CQ WW DX 2006
participants.
So, lets start. Because We see the case with SP2FAX, it's starts working.
:-)
Case No 1
-------------
CQ WW DX 2006 SSB.
LY2IJ was classified 5th World High, 160M HP Unassisted.
Log at http://cqww.com/ssblogs/ly2ij/
OPERATORS: LY2IJ
SOAPBOX:
LOCATION: DX
CATEGORY-OPERATOR: SINGLE-OP
CATEGORY-TRANSMITTER: ONE
CATEGORY-ASSISTED: NON-ASSISTED
CATEGORY-BAND: 160M
CATEGORY-POWER: HIGH
CATEGORY-MODE: SSB
LY2IJ has changed CQ QRG some 6 times during entire conest. Made 44 quick
QSY out of CQ QRG to work spotted stations, and only 4 QSY to work stations
that were not spotted recently (I did not check ON4KST chat room history
info).
Total : 44 spotted QSO 44/1081 = 4.07 % (80 % of all QSO's made out of CQ
QRG)
only 6 QSO out of CQ QRG were not spotted
10 spotted country multipliers 10/69 = 14.49 %
5 mins 3/10 = 30 %
10 mins 6/10 = 60 %
15 mins 8/10 = 80 %
20 mins 8/10 = 80 %
30 mins 10/10 = 100
It's clear that LY2IJ was cheating in the contest.
Eliminating those spotted QSO's/multipliers would leave him out of the Tops.
Case No 2
-----------
CQ WW DX 2006 CW.
LY2IJ classified 2nd World High, 160M HP Unassisted, was awarded Europe -
1.8 MHz trophy presented by N9RV and N4TZ.
Log at http://cqww.com/cwlogs/ly2ij/
OPERATORS: LY2IJ
SOAPBOX:
LOCATION: DX
CATEGORY-OPERATOR: SINGLE-OP
CATEGORY-TRANSMITTER: ONE
CATEGORY-ASSISTED: NON-ASSISTED
CATEGORY-BAND: 160M
CATEGORY-POWER: HIGH
CATEGORY-MODE: CW
Normally, when people tuning radio on the band and working stations, only
20 - 40 persents of their QSO were spotted in one hour range (I have checked
several stations from Eu that worked honestly Single band (160 - 40M), but
almost all LY2IJ QSO's made out of CQ QRG were recently spotted. He was
using packet information very intensively making quick jumps from one edge
of the band to the other one.
I found in His log
83 Spotted QSO 83/1583 = 5.2 %
10 mins 52/83 = 62.65 %
20 mins 72/83 = 86.7 %
30 mins 79/83 = 95.2 %
40 mins 80/83 = 96.38 %
50 mins 83/83 = 100 %
38 spotted country multipliers 38/109 = 34.86 %
5 mins 12/38 = 31.57 %
10 mins 25/38 = 65.78 %
15 mins 30/38 = 78.94 %
20 mins 36/38 = 94.73 %
30 mins 37/38 = 97.36 %
The conclusion is very simple - mister Arunas, LY2IJ stoled Contest trophy
from Nigel, G3TXF.
Case No 3
-----------
CQ WW DX 2006 CW.
T96Q classified 2nd World High, 40M HP Unassisted, 1st Europe, was awarded
Europe - 7 MHz trophy presented by 9A3A.
Log at http://cqww.com/cwlogs/t96q/
OPERATORS: T96Q
LOCATION: DX
CATEGORY-OPERATOR: SINGLE-OP
CATEGORY-TRANSMITTER: ONE
CATEGORY-ASSISTED: NON-ASSISTED
CATEGORY-BAND: 40M
CATEGORY-POWER: HIGH
Very rude operation, T96Q
1. Changed CQ QRG only ONCE on first day!
2. Changed CQ QRG only 5 times during entire Contest!
38 QSO were made out of CQ QRG.
35 of them were recently spotted.( 35/3511 = 1% )
23 spotted QSO were DXCC multipliers ( 23/152 = 15.1% )
65 % of worked spots were DXCC multipliers.
Time distrubution:
5 mins 13/35 = 37.14 %
10 mins 23/35 = 65.57 %
15 mins 27/35 = 77.14 %
20 mins 32/35 = 91.42 %
30 mins 34/35 = 97.14 %
Unfortunately, contest trophy went to wrong person again.
T96Q SSB Contest operation looks like pretty similar, especially on Sunday.
Case No 4
-----------
CQ WW DX 2006 CW.
S50K classified 5th World High, 15M HP Unassisted, 2nd Europe.
Log at http://cqww.com/cwlogs/s50k/
OPERATORS: S50K
SOAPBOX:
LOCATION: DX
CATEGORY-OPERATOR: SINGLE-OP
CATEGORY-TRANSMITTER: ONE
CATEGORY-ASSISTED: NON-ASSISTED
CATEGORY-BAND: 15M
CATEGORY-POWER: HIGH
CATEGORY-MODE: CW
I tried to analyse QSO's that were made out of CQ QRG.
Normaly We tuning the band either UP or DWN. When I see sudden jump oposit
direction, I can suspect use of the packet cluster.
We can see in the S50K log only little real S/P operations at the time when
the band is closing down, at the start operation after the break or while
looking for the clear CQ QRG. Most of other QSO's out of CQ QRG were made by
QSY'ing to work the spotted station (S50K tried to hard to work multipliers
spots only) or leaving QRG for cleaning yhe bandmap from the spots.
50 of the suspected 53 QSO were multipliers
50/138 = 36.23 %
Time distrubution:
5 mins 15/53 = 28.30 %
10 mins 26/53 = 49.05 %
15 mins 36/53 = 67.92 %
20 mins 46/53 = 86.79 %
30 mins 49/53 = 92.45 %
---------------------------
Case No 5
-----------
CQ WW DX 2006 CW.
S50R classified 3rd Europe High, 15M HP Unassisted
Log at http://cqww.com/cwlogs/s50r/
CALLSIGN: S50R
CATEGORY-Operator: SINGLE-OP
CATEGORY-Transmitter: ONE
CATEGORY-Band: 15M
CATEGORY-Power: HIGH
CATEGORY-Assisted: NON-ASSISTED
S50R started S/P, was working spots like mad.
S50R made 1377 QSO, 138 Country multipliers, 38 Zone multipliers.
186 QSO were recently spotted.
77 of them were multipliers
77/138 = 55.79% Country multipliers were spotted less than 30 minutes before
were logged.
S50R worked 2 (TWO!) incorrectly spotted stations A52R (instead of AH2R) and
6Y4AA (instead of 9Y4AA):
Spot:
A52R 06/11/26 0615Z 21033.0 A5 RK9AWN
S50R mistakenly logged spotted QSO:
QSO: 21033 CW 2006-11-26 0622 S50R 599 15 A52R 599
22
Spot:
6Y4AA 06/11/26 1611Z 21075.2 W3LJ
S50R QSO - another BIG poor operator's mistake:
QSO: 21075 CW 2006-11-26 1620 S50R 599 15 6Y4AA 599
8
Spots time distrubution:
5 mins 74/186 = 39.78 %
10 mins 133/186 = 71.50 %
15 mins 158/186 = 84.94 %
20 mins 178/186 = 95.70 %
30 mins 185/186 = 99.46 %
Nothing more to say - another paccet cheater stoled Top six place from some
one else.
-------------------------------
Case No 6
-----------
CQ WW DX 2006 CW.
OK3C (operator OK2ZC) , 20M LP, 6th Eu
OK3C (operator OK2ZC) made 1157 QSO, 123 Country multipliers, 38 Zone
multipliers.
124 QSO were recently spotted.
124/1157 = 10.71%
68 of them were multipliers
68/123 = 55.28% Country multipliers were spotted less than 30 minutes before
were logged.
Spots time distrubution:
5 mins 60/124 = 48.38 %
10 mins 95/124 = 76.61 %
15 mins 110/124 = 88.71 %
20 mins 118/124 = 95.16 %
30 mins 122/124 = 98.39 %
-----------------------------
-----------------------------
Case No 7
-----------
CQ WW DX 2006 CW.
CT1AOZ, 10M LP, 1st Europe
CT1AOZ made 446 QSO, 89 Country multipliers, 24 Zone multipliers.
38 QSO at least were recently spotted.
17 of them were multipliers
17/89 = 19.10% Country multipliers were spotted less than 30 minutes before
were logged.
Spots time distrubution:
5 mins 17/38 = 44.74 %
10 mins 28/38 = 73.68 %
15 mins 31/38 = 81.57 %
20 mins 33/38 = 86.84 %
30 mins 37/38 = 97.36 %
-------------------------------
-------------------------------
Personaly for me US 160m Top Six looks like very interesting as well. When I
see number of recently spotted QSO is some where 80 - 90 % of all His S/P
QSO's made in the Contest, while other station has only about 50 % of that
kind of QSO's, I can hardly explain how this is possible. But, because I'm
not aware how the bands sounds on other side of the pond myself, I'm not
going to name these callsigns until making more deep analysis. I still need
some more spare time to prove or deny my suspicious.
If some one interesting (maybe some one from CQ contest committee? :-) ), I
can send
logs analysis as a text files for those callsigns mentioned above, in the
way I did with the SN2B logs in my earlier posting.
Once again, I congratulate Contest sponsors intention to open logs for the
public. Sure, it will make thinking some people before starting cheating in
the Contest. I encourage to make future step - to make it public long before
final results are released.
Sure, I'm going to lose some points in the RDXC next weekend after
publishing this.
But anyway,
73 & CU on the bands.
Gedas, LY3BA / LY9A
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|