CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] cqcontest.net

To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] cqcontest.net
From: "Rich Assarabowski" <konecc@snet.net>
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2016 21:34:38 -0400
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
I think everyone else in the world has merged the categories because no other 
contest sponsors have the resources or ambition to do
the extensive log checking required to uncover the cheaters.    I'm sure it 
adds considerably to your work load to do all that added
log checking and to send out all those e-mails for suspected use of the Cluster 
in the unassisted categories.   

I frequently hear the statement made by my European friends that CQ and ARRL 
are "technologically backward" by not eliminating the
"classic old-fashioned" unassisted categories which they assume is full of 
cheaters.    The frequent abuse in the QRP category  is
the same reason why the QRP category is is becoming less popular, at least in 
Europe.

--- Rich K1CC


> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Randy Thompson K5ZD" <k5zd@charter.net>
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Sent: Tuesday, April 5, 2016 8:07:34 AM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] cqcontest.net
> 
> There is another option...  Rather than continue to get twisted in 
> defining the separation, we could merge SO and SOA into one and remove all 
> confusion.
> There could be an overlay category for the guys who want to compare 
> themselves to other "classic" ops.
> 
> It seems only CQ, ARRL, and SAC maintain the assisted concept.  The 
> rest of the world has moved on.
> 
> Randy, K5ZD

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>