One more thing...
Short term -many people unhappy.
Long term - Vast majority unhappy when other aspects of assisted (code readers)
in combination with this would culminate in total automation of CW Contesting.
Sent from Stan's IPhone
> On Jul 31, 2017, at 8:11 AM, Stan Stockton <wa5rtg@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Here we go again.
>
> The answer to your question has zero relevance on whether they should be
> combined.
>
> Do the results show being assisted is a detriment like QRP is a detriment as
> compared to low power. If so, it's like me saying that QRP scores don't beat
> low power scores so why not combine those categories.
>
> If anyone thinks that SO scores would not be as good if those top operators
> used the internet to provide them a list of multipliers to work, they have no
> clue. If a survey was taken of those who operate SO in serious fashion the
> result would be they don't want them combined.
>
> I have yet to see any logical reason to eliminate the category other than it
> is difficult to enforce the rules.
>
> 73... Stan, K5GO
>
>
>
> Sent from Stan's IPhone
>
>
>
>> On Jul 31, 2017, at 6:26 AM, Trent Sampson <vk4ts@outlook.com> wrote:
>>
>> The Assisted category in the CQWW is 25 years old this year;
>>
>> It was created because of the advantages" given to operators who were using
>> the spotter networks
>>
>> In all of the 25 years of assisted categories in the CQWW how many times has
>> the world SOAB (Assisted) beaten the SOAB (Unassisted) ? - It is a trick
>> question
>>
>> Based on factual information is there any reason to not combine the
>> categories ? before you answer look at the data...
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
|