CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

[CQ-Contest] Are you kidding me (AC0C comments)

To: CQ-Contest Reflector <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Are you kidding me (AC0C comments)
From: James Cain <jamesdavidcain@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 18:36:29 +0000
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
I can see it now! In CW contests we will be required to begin every
exchange with "Please copy" (sent in Morse, of course). This will "align"
CW contests with phone contests. Just one more step in the search for the
lowest common denominator. Darwin was right but that's just science.

cain K1TN

----

There are non-assisted categories in CQWW RTTY so using a RTTY decoder should
be excluded from the QSO alerting definition.

The WPX RTTY rules are still different from the new "aligned with RTTY"
Phone and CW rules. Standard RTTY single operator time is only 30 hours
(vs. 36 on Phone/CW)) and 160m is prohibited on RTTY.

John KK9A



Douglas KR2Q wrote:

Jeff notes that RTTY WPX has no separate unassisted category.

Perhaps (maybe?) the answer is in the rules.

Look at WPX Rule IX.2 (QSO alerting...) definition

SNIP
The use of any technology that provides CALLSIGN identification of a signal
to the operator (minor editing on my part).  On CW, even use of a CW coder
makes you assisted.
END SNIP

Well, I know there are a lot of really great CW ops out there, but I don't
think anybody can decode RY by listening to it (except maybe a CQ or a
string of RYs).

So it is impossible to NOT use technology to identify the callsign...hence,
no "unassisted" category (because every entrant MUST be assisted, per the
WPX definitions).

Does that pass the smell test?  I dunno.

de Doug KR2Q
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

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