Internet access is becoming less of an issue every day. At normal QSO
rates, even slow dial-up can handle the regular submission of an XML
text packet describing a QSO. N6KT rates may require broadband :-)
Some contests will likely appear that require on-line connection
throughout. The scoreboards for existing contests will probably evolve
to handle more and more scoring in real-time until the non-connected
entries are handled like paper logs today, integrated into the results
by a manual process.
73, Ward N0AX
On 3/10/2013 12:05 PM, Kelly Taylor wrote:
As long as real-time reporting does not become the price of entry.
Odd as it may sound, there are enough operators who don't have access to the
internet from the places they wish to contest from.
73, kelly
ve4xt
On 3/10/13 9:46 AM, "Randy Thompson K5ZD" <k5zd@charter.net> wrote:
The CQWW published raw scores just 7 days after the contest for CW/SSB in
2012. We will continue to do so. Waiting to see how you did is getting
shorter.
The online real-time score boards are the way to go. They make the contest
into a real video game/race.
-----Original Message-----
From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
Ward Silver
Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2013 3:36 PM
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Real-time Radiosport
In my opinion, the biggest obstacle to maintaining the connected
generation's interest in radiosport is how long it takes to figure out
who actually won. The contests are fairly exciting and challenging
whether you use spotting information or not. They get that and are
intrigued by the worldwide aspect and the dependence on solar and
terrestrial conditions. But their interest usually dissipates
immediately (and irrevocably) when you explain that the results aren't
known for several weeks or months. Even the fastest reporting - WRTC's
24-hours - is ridiculous to someone accustomed to knowing their score and
place not only immediately following the end of the game but at all times
throughout the game.
So we can argue all we want about format and point counts and spots or no
spots but those come in a distant second. I don't believe there is much
to be gained by changing the user interface to be more game-like, rather
to use the power of the Internet to conduct the administration of the
event in the time-frame to which people have become accustomed.
"Waiting for the magazine to come out" is not part of the modern sporting
lexicon.
73, Ward N0AX
On 3/10/2013 6:09 AM, W9OL wrote:
I would only comment that....if you watch the kids today. They play
video games. Faster, more instinctive, instant gratification, almost
to the point of addictive. A slower, more polite, contest may not
attract any of the young bloods. Now don't dump on me....I work a lot
of contests, nice and easy, chase who I want, and have a quiet type of
fun. But I don't think the kids - potentially ham contesters, would
find a more relaxed contesting style attractive. But then I may be
wrong...it happens, ask my wife! On 2013-03-09 4:48 PM, Radio K0HB
wrote:
Radioman skills would improve. Contesting would be a lot more
rewarding, with a real sense of accomplishment.
On Saturday, March 9, 2013, Tom Osborne wrote:
What is the downside of nobody using cluster spots in contests?
73
Tom W7WHY
_______________________________________________
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
|