Hello Don.
I believe no one is even questioning the way logs were adjudicated at all. At
least that was not, nor is, nor will be my intention.
Those of us who have had the chance to participate in WRTCs as competitors (in
my case WRTC 2000 and 2006) have a very clear picture of the great deal of care
and work the judging team performs to adjudicate the logs.
The originating email about cheerleading was aimed at confirming what Willy
UA9BA communicated in advance of what he was going to do regarding this matter.
Later ,during the contest it was not nice to see S53MM publicly telling
everybody what the call of the S5 team was.
We certainly know you all took all possible precautions to adjudicate the logs.
If I expressed my ideas in the wrong way I sure apologize in advance.
What I mean when I say IMPACT is based on what I was able to listen during the
competition. Every time a spot occurred for a given station the rate increased
significantly and those nice mini pile ups lasted for at least five minutes.
Then, they dried up and WRTC stations continued to work at a good peace, not
at the same as when the packet spot occurred though.
I’m not questioning the results, since the fourteen spots difference that the
top team has over the second and third place runner ups, could have easily been
produced by them going to the right band in the right moment, or because the
changed running frequencies more often, that, I don’t know and certainly is
speculation till logs are made available to the public.
We all know a station must be present in X number of logs to consider it valid,
etc, but still, the IMPACT will still be there. It is not the same for the
teams
to work 150 stations evenly distributed across one hour, because they work
hard
to achieve that number, than it is to work the same number because you received
extra spots that made your rate climb during certain periods of that particular
hour, giving you more time to focus on working mults for example.
Be sure I was not trying to question the amazing work every one at 2010 WRTC
did. It just a matter of analyzing if something can be improved for the future
WRTCs. Furthermore, considering how close the top teams came in from each other
in the final standings. To me, the fact that WRTC teams must remain anonymous
is
a great way to eliminate the cheerleading factor in whatever way it may take
place. That would level the playing field even more and I bet it will make the
work of the judging committee a bit easier.
Best 73.
Martin, LU5DX
www.5bits.net/lu5dx
facebook.com/hamradionews
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don Field don.field at gmail.com
Wed Jul 14 02:22:29 PDT 2010
* Previous message: [CQ-Contest] List of WRTC stations /
Results /Overspottinganditsimpact
* Next message: [CQ-Contest] List of WRTC stations /
Results /Overspottinganditsimpact
* Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
________________________________
There has been a lot of (largely uninformed) speculation on here as to the
impact of cheerleading, the way logs were adjudicated, etc. I will try to
address some of these issues in the article I have been asked to write for NCJ
about the whole WRTC experience. Suffice to say that WRTC was quite amazing
and
really does seem to have come the closest yet to the mythical "level playing
field". The Russian support was incredible, some of the helpers (installing
tents and antennas, helping with transport, etc) had travelled overland from as
far away as UA9/0. For many reasons, some of us expected the results to be
dominated by Russian teams, mainly because they have been using this particular
format in their RRTC event for many years. The (very worthy) winning team, from
what their referee told me, operated as one - barely exchanging a word, but
being almost telepathic in their teamwork, largely because they have been
operating together at RU1A and elsewhere for 30 years. But the Estonian and US
teams in 2nd and 3rd place did an amazing job to do so well in what, for them,
was largely a new format. (for those who don't know, the rules allowed both
operators to run and/or S&P, albeit with an "octopus" so only one tx could be
on
at a time - technically this really meant having a triplexer to allow the beam
to be used by both rigs simultaneously; from an operating point of view it
required close co-ordination between the ops) It will be interesting to see
what innovations the next WRTC brings - Moscow will be a hard act to follow.
Don G3XTT (having had the privilege of being part of the judging team)
Martin, LU5DX
www.5bits.net/lu5dx
http://lu5dx.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|