Contesting is that what you do yourself in a contest.
I don´t use databases nor an automated station, until a year ago for a band
change I still had to swap the coax cables and I still have to switch and
adjust pi-nets by hand.
Fun is still the same as some decades ago.
73
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
Charles Harpole
Doug, I fully agree with you, but we must face the fact that contesting is
no more. Automation of all kinds has removed the original reason for
contests... copying skill improvement and fun.
Now a "contest" is an exercise in using data bases and automated stations
which are very different skills. Mourn for the good old days and contest
for yourself, not the other bogus scores.
My reaction is to seldom send in a log and never even look at other
scores.... meaningless now.... and no way to recover the former contest
ways.
73, Charly
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 6:07 PM, <kr2q@optimum.net> wrote:
> OK, I admit it. I have NEVER been a proponent of SCP (or that ilk). So
> I'll once again (been
> many years now, so it's time) ask why SCP is allowed for non-assisted
> entries (or at all).
>
> For me, either you copy the call, zone, SN, name, SEC, etc yourself or you
> don't.
>
> So much has been automated during a contest, just what is left for the
> entrant to do that
> demonstrates actual contest skill? Not even copy the call sign?
>
> At the heart of each contest QSO is getting the call and exchange right.
> If you have to rely
> on a database (EG SCP), was that really a valid QSO?
>
> Going back ages, I recall a DX ham (Riki) who used "a database" on 160m.
> When challenged,
> he said that the database only helped him to confirm the call he had
> copied. Really? If you knew
> you had copied it, why need to "check?" Of course, the answer is that it
> wasn't "copied," but
> needed to be teased out. I mean, it's a long way from most eastern part
> of zone 20 to the rest
> of the world.
>
> More recently, a well-known contester that I have always respected, gave
> me an example
> of what he felt was an "appropriate use" of SCP. "Let's say I'm on 75m
> and the band is
> noisy and I just can't confirm the other guys full call. If I look at
> SCP, I can see a list of
> calls and I can say, 'Is your call XY1ABC?' and if he says YES, then I
> know I have a good
> contact." Huh? For me, this is exactly why SCP should NOT be allowed.
> THAT was a "good"
> QSO? You never copied his full call. You took an total GUESS base on
> SCP. What if he didn't
> say YES? Then what? No QSO or "take a chance?"
>
> Other arguments include, "Why should I be penalized for not having as good
> a memory for
> call signs as K1AR (or your favorite contester)?" Just because he can
> remember 10,000
> calls doesn't mean I'm not as a good a contester. So I use SCP to make up
> for that aspect.
>
> And I suppose he also runs 10KW to "make up" for atmospheric losses.
>
> Really, there is NO legitimate reason to use SCP during a contest unless
> you just want to have
> FUN also sending the guys name during a contest which does not require
> that you copy his/her
> name.
>
> It always is disappointing to me to see the URGENT plea's to share your
> log file so that SCP
> can be updated.
>
> SCP is just pure BS for the true (honest) contester. Too late? Can't get
> the genie back into
> the bottle? Yes, I know. But that doesn't mean it is right.
>
> de Doug KR2Q
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
--
Charly, HS0ZCW
_______________________________________________
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
|