I preface this by saying that I don't know whether there is objective and
absolute proof that TO7A cheated or not. It doesn't sound like it, my "belief
or feeling" is that there was not and if, and only if not, then this...
You know it really doesn't matter what Tom, Dick, Harry, Steve, Rich, Stan or
Randy and four others "believe". If determinations are made by the contest
committee to disqualify an otherwise World #1 entry based on their feelings,
beliefs, speculation, guesswork, etc. we have a real problem. He either used
assistance or not. The contest committee either has solid, objective proof
that he used assistance or they don't.
Looking at a log to say for sure whether an operator was using assistance is
absurd. Saying that someone moved 15 or 50 kHz between two S&P QSOs and both
were multipliers and therefore he was assisted is absurd. Accusing someone of
cheating and throwing out their log without solid proof is not right.
Early in the contest almost every pileup is a new mult. Late in the contest
many of the extremely large pileups are new multipliers. If you were in the
Carribean, ran Europe for a couple hours on a new band and then used a pan
adapter and a directive antenna at USA to jump on every high signal strength
pileup you see...guess what? They will likely be zone 8,9,10,11,12,13 and you
probably haven't worked any of them.
Even without a pan adapter do you know just how much stronger a pileup is
coming from the USA to the Carribean than it is if everyone's antenna is
pointed 90 degrees farther north and how easy it is to pick those pileups out?
I looked at my log from the same contest, started questioning whether I used
assistance based on everything I've read here (and I did not use assistance)
and wondering if I had been good enough to add a few thousand contacts and win
whether it would have been questioned.
The only question in my mind has nothing to do with whether Dim cheated or not.
It has to do with what criteria is used to determine who cheated and who did
not. If it is not objective, I don't like it.
73... Stan, K5GO
Sent from my iPad
> On May 7, 2015, at 11:06 PM, Tom Haavisto <kamham69@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Before anyone starts throwing rocks at Randy, we need to remember he is not
> working alone on reviewing logs. There are a number of top ops that are
> part of the contest committee. My expectation would be that it would take
> more than one person to say "This does not look right..." If the contest
> committee - AS A GROUP say a log does not pass muster, that certainly
> raises the confidence level by a few more notches over one persons opinion
>
> And - with public logs - anyone who wishes can also look and come to their
> own conclusion as to whether a log is believable.
>
> Tom - VE3CX
>
>
>
>> On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Steve London <n2icarrl@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Quit bellyaching. Download and study Dimitry's log yourself. Draw your own
>> conclusions.
>>
>> http://www.cqww.com/publiclogs/2014cw/to7a.log
>>
>> Are his rates believable ?
>> When he works multipliers not on his run frequency, is it believable
>> without assistance ?
>> Is his SO2R pileup management believable ?
>> How does his log compare with other superb operators, who also operated
>> from the Caribbean ? Those logs are also public.
>> Consider whether he is exploiting new, but perfectly legal, techniques
>> that other's have not yet mastered.
>>
>> This is exactly why CQWW logs were made public - so that you can see for
>> yourself. How about a little crowdsourcing, instead of throwing rocks at
>> the CQWW director ? (For those of you still living in the 20th century:
>> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crowdsourcing )
>>
>> 73,
>> Steve, N2IC
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
|