Well reasoned and well stated, Doug.
Regarding your last point ("It's no longer an operator contest, but has
become a technology contest."), I will take some exception, and use your
opening statement to frame my comments.
"Many years ago contesting was a competition of an operator and station
against the world."
Stated a little differently, you could say "A competitor was the fellow
acquired good skills and built a good station."
That description says that a contest is a blend of "operator" and
"technology". I think that blend is a "good thing" --- after all, we are
charged by our regulators to "advance the state of the radio art", and I
think that contesting, more than any other subset of the amateur radio
hobby, has contributed to that advancement.
With that in mind, here is a PBI ("Partially Baked Idea") for
consideration/development by the gathered brains here. Be gentle. I am
almost making this up as I type, so there will likely be gaping holes in the
PBI.
I am going to suggest a different approach to "Single Operator" categories.
Rather that two categories (Assisted and Not Assisted) I suggest three
categories.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Single Op CLASSIC: This is the bare bones "boy and his radio". All the
information he uses in the contest is gathered by his own ears in real time
during the contest. He uses no aids such as clusters, RBN's, skimmers
(local or remote), SCP, pre-fills, lists, tables, or other paraphernalia to
acquire callsign/frequency information, or to sanitize/groom/verify what he
copies "off the air".
His logging software should function only to record what he copies/sends,
perform other logging housekeeping (band/frequency recording, serial number
incrementing), and voice or CW keying. It might also include a
manually-filled bandmap facility. This class is NOT restricted to any
length of operating time.
The defining characteristic of this class would be that ALL information in
the log is GATHERED AND DEVELOPED BY THE OPERATOR from the passband of his
receiver(s) during the contest time frame. Built-in band scopes which
simply show "activity" without station identification are almost ubiquitous,
and would be allowed.
This class would tend to favor the OPERATOR with high skill level and , but
good TECHNOLOGY (station design, antenna building, etc.) is still a
component.
2) Single Op LOCAL: This class would allow locally developed/operating aids
such as SCP, prefills, and even a LOCAL skimmer type technology. The SCP
and pre-fill information would come from THAT STATION's own logs, not from
outside sources. Basically an "anything goes" Single Op using only
information OBTAINED AND DEVELOPED INSIDE THAT STATION either in real time
or from previous contests. No OUTSIDE callsign/frequency information or
records could be used.
The defining characteristic of the class would be that any LOCAL
(on-premise) technology would be permitted.
This class would favor those with high OPERATOR skill, and at the same time
encourage "out of the envelope" thinking about the information-gathering
TECHNOLOGY.
3) Single Op CONNECTED: This class would allow any and all local and
OUTSIDE aids, equivalent to the current "Assisted" and "Unlimited" classes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
73, de Hans, K0HB
--
"Just a boy and his radio"™
--
Proud Member of:
. ARRL - http://www.arrl.org
. RSGB - http://www.rsgb.org
. A1 Operators - http://www.arrl.org/a-1-op
. Minnesota Wireless contesters - http://www.W0AA.org
. Arizona Outlaws contesters - http://www.arizonaoutlaws.net
. Twin City DX Assn - http://www.tcdxa.org
. Minnesota Amateur Radio Technical Society - http://www.mn-arts.org/
. Lake Vermilion DX Assn - http://www.lvdxa.org
. Royal Naval Amateur Radio Society - http://www.rnars.org.uk/
. SOC - http://www.qsl.net/soc
. CW Operators Club – http://www.cwops.org
. SKCC - http://www.skccgroup.com/
--
-----Original Message-----
From: Doug Renwick
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2015 3:12 PM
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: [CQ-Contest] The Rise and Fall of Contesting
Many years ago contesting was a competition of an operator and station
against the world. It was all hand logging and using the smarts between
one's ears. I achieved some pretty good results both at home and on
dxpeditions (8P6B, J7D, ZF1MM, /VP2V, etc. Essentially I proved to myself
that I could compete with the best. And contesting was a good way to
increase my country/band count. There were less ways of cheating.
Technology has in a way ruined contesting. Today there are many more
different ways to enhance a score using the available technology.
Technology has become a crutch.
Consider the time wasted in trying to adjust the rules to cover all the
different categories and all the different technologies. Contesting is
bogged down with rules and regulations.
Today if I decide to operate in a contest fully or just part time, I usually
don't submit a log. Sometimes I am asked to submit a check log. I don't
have to prove anything to myself. Why should I submit a log with all the
rules mumbo jumbo and all the many more ways to cheat. I operate just for
the fun of operating. And yes I use some of the new technologies like
computer logging.
It's no longer an operator contest, but has become a technology contest.
Doug
Generation of idiots - smart phones and dumb people.
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com
_______________________________________________
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
|