CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Convergence and Change

To: Stan Stockton <wa5rtg@gmail.com>, "Martin, LU5DX" <lu5dx@lucg.com.ar>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Convergence and Change
From: Bob Kupps via CQ-Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Reply-to: "n6bk@yahoo.com" <n6bk@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 01:38:07 +0000 (UTC)
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Hi well all I have to add is that I hope that there will always be as many 
categories of competition as possible. I applaud the efforts of the WWROF and 
others for keeping radiosport competition as fair as possible and if they could 
improve their efforts with more funds and or manpower then I encourage them to 
appeal to the contest community for it. Hopefully competition organizers will 
not be forced toward the lowest common denominator.  73 Bob HS0ZIA

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android 
 
  On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 4:33 AM, Stan Stockton<wa5rtg@gmail.com> wrote:   I'm 
curious as to why the assisted operators want to eliminate the unassisted 
category and for that matter why their opinion matters?

Is there any answer to the question above?

Obviously, by definition, those who operated unassisted don't want to eliminate 
it.  

Stan, K5GO

Sent from Stan's IPhone



> On May 24, 2016, at 10:53 AM, Martin, LU5DX <lu5dx@lucg.com.ar> wrote:
> 
> Again, personal preferences first.
> You will be able to keep entering contests in the way you want, even if
> categories are merged.
> No one will force to point and click for Qs.
> It makes sense to change after thirty years, mainly because competition is
> not fair given rules the way they are.
> Even if it is about at a zone or country level, results cannot be properly
> adjudicated, simply because the improper use of dx alerting cannot be
> proved to the extent needed.
> We have a way to eliminate a very effective and undetectable way of
> cheating and all we do is look for excuses not to do it. We base our
> propositions in our personsal likes and dislikes, or on the fact that out
> hobby also suffers of other ways of cheating like power abuse, log padding,
> ghost ops, remote receivers, etc.
> Pretty amazing!
> 
> 73,
> Martin LU5DX
> El may 24, 2016 9:49, "Bill Hider" <n3rr@erols.com> escribió:
> 
> I totally agree with Mark, KD4D and I am a SOA operator and I want to keep
> the SO & SOA categories separate.
> Why would anyone care to combine them after the nearly 30 years we've
> managed to keep them separate?
> I say "we" because I was in the vanguard in the 1980s participating as a M/S
> just because I was using packet as a single op
> and there was no such thing as "assisted" or "unlimited".  I took spots in
> off the packet and printed them using my ASR TTY machine.
> Later on, back then, I was able to make a 1,000,000 point score in ARRL DX
> by clicking on the spots - great FUN!
> 
> For me it's two things:
> It's more FUN for me to operate SOA than SO.
> Having two categories means more awards which equals more participation
> which equals more FUN!
> 
> Simple.
> 
> Bill N3RR
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> kd4d@comcast.net
> Sent: Monday, May 23, 2016 11:11 AM
> To: cq-contest
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Convergence and Change
> 
> Good day, Martin:
> 
> It makes sense to keep the separation between single operator and single
> operator Assisted/Unlimited because many of us believe the skill involved in
> finding stations to work without having a computer or other operator do it
> for us is worth measuring (and a lot of fun).  The organizers of WRTC, for
> one, agree - look at their rules sometime.
> 
> It is not obvious that operators who don't use the DX alerting assistance
> (particularly on CW) will do better than those who do not - THAT is what the
> SOs are complaining about.  We don't want to be forced to use DX alerting
> assistance to compete.  The same operators, using DX alerting assistance,
> will make higher scores than they do without...The CW skimmers/RBN have made
> this particularly obvious for CW operations.
> 
> Clearly, combining the categories is all about comparing the highest scores
> for everyone and everyone wishing to be competitive will use DX alerting
> assistance if the categories are combined.  I certainly use it in WAE (where
> there is one category) when I operate that contest.
> 
> Why do the advocates of combining the categories - surely they only operate
> Assisted - want to combine the categories anyway?  I understand the concerns
> of the contest organizers, but why do any of the Assisted operators care?
> 
> 73,
> 
> Mark, KD4D
> 
> At this point it makes no sense to keep this separation anymore.
> 
> In the end, SO will keep doing better than those who use DX alerting
> assistance, so what SOs are complaining about?
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "LU5DX Martin" <lu5dx@lucg.com.ar>
> To: "Davor Kucelin" <davor.kucelin@plavalaguna.hr>, "cq-contest"
> <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 11:08:25 PM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Convergence and Change
> 
> What's your point?
> 
> Combining SOAB and SOAB(A) has nothing to do with comparing the highest
> scores in each category.
> 
> It's about eliminating  the possibility of taking even a very small unfair
> advantage throughout the 48-hour period that can place a cheater above
> his/her competitors (even if it is very little above in the rankings)
> 
> It also has to do with eliminating the burden and work overload that implies
> trying to find those who cheat.
> 
> Reality is that ops who cheat have perfected their techniques beyond what
> can be detected by log checkers. Those who get caught year after year are
> those who abuse of DX clusters in a very obvious way.
> 
> At this point it makes no sense to keep this separation anymore.
> 
> In the end, SO will keep doing better than those who use DX alerting
> assistance, so what SOs are complaining about?
> 
> They can even still use a pen and paper logs and send CW with a straight key
> if they want.
> 
> Are there still contesters out there entering contests because they think
> they are winning anything at all, or winning over anybody at all??
> 
> What in the world would make someone think he/she is winning over someone
> who is thousand of miles away, with totally different equipment, propagation
> and participating according to a bunch of rules that are hardly
> enforceable?t
> 
> C'mon guys. It seems like intelligence is inversely proportional to egos
> among certain high profile contesters :-)
> 
> Our "competitions" have nothing of real competitions. It is just a game of
> enjoyment, but if we are still going to pretend these are competitions, at
> least we can establish the foundations to make them something a bit more
> trustworthy in those terms.
> 
> 73,
> 
> Martin LU5DX
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 4:03 AM, Davor Kucelin <davor.kucelin@plavalaguna.hr
>> wrote:
> 
>> CQWW SSB Top 10 scores all years
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> SOABHP
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 1            EA8BH  1999      SO HP ALL          25,646,796
>> 10,253  176        692        -              N5TJ
>> 
>> 2            CN2R    2004      SO HP ALL          20,938,680
>> 8,655    172        668        -              W7EJ
>> 
>> 3            D4B        2004      SO HP ALL          20,433,438
>> 8,799    172        674        -              4L5A
>> 
>> 4            D4B        2003      SO HP ALL          20,119,968
>> 8,956    169        634        -              4L5A
>> 
>> 5            CN2R    2003      SO HP ALL          18,743,250
>> 8,682    152        594        -              W7EJ
>> 
>> 6            HC8A    1999      SO HP ALL          18,607,050
>> 8,638    175        595        -              N6KT
>> 
>> 7            CN2R    2011      SO HP ALL          18,518,160
>> 8,409    167        593        44.7      W7EJ
>> 
>> 8            CN2R    2013      SO HP ALL          18,277,746
>> 8,370    167        579        46.9      W7EJ    [Cert]
>> 
>> 9            HC8A    2000      SO HP ALL          18,122,040
>> 9,160    163        547        -              N6KT
>> 
>> 10          8P5A    2013      SO HP ALL          17,059,840
>> 10,126  162        518        48.0      W2SC
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> SOAB ASSISTED HP
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 1            9Y4ZC    2003      SA HP ALL          14,979,055
>> 8,114    137        500        -              DL6FBL
>> 
>> 2            P40A    2011      SA HP ALL          14,332,656
>> 7,478    156        513        43.5      KK9A
>> 
>> 3            TM6M  2015      SA HP ALL          14,263,470
>> 7,057    168        667        47.9      F8DBF  [Cert]
>> 
>> 4            P40P      2002      SA HP ALL          12,975,732
>> 6,639    154        528        -              W5AJ
>> 
>> 5            EF8U    2013      SA HP ALL          12,743,163
>> 6,656    154        533        45.0      EA8RM [Cert]
>> 
>> 6            NN3W  2011      SA HP ALL          11,828,236
>> 4,921    185        683        44.7      @N3HBX
>> 
>> 7            OH0X    2015      SA HP ALL          11,790,240
>> 6,294    174        706        48.0      OH6KZP              [Cert]
>> 
>> 8            P40W    2003      SA HP ALL          11,755,443
>> 6,730    137        496        -              W2GD
>> 
>> 9            D4B        2002      SA HP ALL          11,567,412
>> 5,845    152        586        -              4L5A
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> CQWW CW Top 10 scores all years
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> SOABHP
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 1            EA8BH  2000      SO HP ALL          18,010,765
>> 7,555    183        634        -              N5TJ
>> 
>> 2            ZF2MJ  2015      SO HP ALL          16,730,788
>> 10,014  170        527        48.0      N6MJ    [Cert]
>> 
>> 3            CR3OO 2015      SO HP ALL          16,090,078
>> 8,812    152        474        48.0      CT1BOH              [Cert]
>> 
>> 4            P40E      2003      SO HP ALL          15,943,070
>> 7,828    169        546        -              CT1BOH
>> 
>> 5            EF8M    2011      SO HP ALL          15,846,012
>> 7,873    160        531        48.0      RD3A
>> 
>> 6            PZ5T      2011      SO HP ALL          15,673,940
>> 7,592    173        545        47.4      VE3DZ
>> 
>> 7            CR3E      2012      SO HP ALL          15,221,316
>> 7,275    170        556        48.0      CT1BOH              [Cert]
>> 
>> 8            CR3E      2011      SO HP ALL          15,151,668
>> 7,212    168        564        48.0      CT1BOH
>> 
>> 9            EF8M    2010      SO HP ALL          15,117,795
>> 7,598    158        535        47.8      RD3A
>> 
>> 10          HC8N    1999      SO HP ALL          14,626,579
>> 7,001    185        546        -              N5KO
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> SOAB ASSISTED HP
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 1            9Y4ZC    2004      SA HP ALL          14,581,665
>> 6,576    169        596        -              DL6FBL
>> 
>> 2            5B/AA1TN          2004      SA HP ALL          13,715,573
>> 6,381    170        627        -              RW3QC
>> 
>> 3            EF9O    2013      SA HP ALL          13,530,554
>> 5,826    171        623        46.6      EA5BM [Cert]
>> 
>> 4            K5ZD/1 2014      SA HP ALL          12,768,365
>> 4,993    190        697        44.3                      [Cert]
>> 
>> 5            EF8U    2013      SA HP ALL          11,955,126
>> 5,700    169        602        44.2      EA8RM [Cert]
>> 
>> 6            CN3A    2010      SA HP ALL          11,818,159
>> 5,729    156        577        46.4
>> 
>> 7            NP4Z    2013      SA HP ALL          11,341,512
>> 6,059    165        591        46.9
>> 
>> 8            K5ZD/1 2015      SA HP ALL          11,275,488
>> 4,742    179        654        44.9                      [Cert]
>> 
>> 9            CT9M    2002      SA HP ALL          11,225,452
>> 5,181    159        605        -              DL2CC
>> 
>> 10          P40C      2014      SA HP ALL          11,085,536
>> 6,242    154        462        44.8      KU1CW
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> So what are we talking about?
>> 
>> Best Assisted score is way below 10th unassisted score.
>> 
>> What are you than scared about to combine the 2 categorys.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 73 Dave 9A1UN
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
> 
> 
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2016.0.7598 / Virus Database: 4568/12285 - Release Date: 05/23/16
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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
  
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>