[CQ-Contest] Allow Packet for everyone!

[MarchandJohn]

JAA26927
Sender: owner-cq-contest at contesting.com
Precedence: bulk
X-List-Info: http://www.contesting.com/cq-contest-faq.html
X-Sponsor: W4AN, KM3T, N5KO & AD1C

HI Doug,

I agree. Packet assist for me was an experiment gone bad--good thing it 
didnt count! FOR ME (anyway) pkt is ok for DXing, but not for contesting.

I was playing with packet in the ssb test for the first time (as a casual 
op.) running QRP.

I found it more of a distraction than a help. The way I see it, if you're 
not
versed in the "ins and outs" of using packet assist, then it becomes a 
burden
rather than a helpfull tool and you can slide into LOSER mode real 
fast.....

In my case, I tended to go into SPOT-REACTION-MODE rather than to 
concentrate
on Q-rate operation mode..... BAD BOY, STUPID BOY!!!!

What happened was, that every time a spot came up for the band I was on, I 
was
on it--Jeez, I was hoppin' around the band like Bugs Bunny and missed more 
q's than I made.  AND my Q-rate went right down the tube!!! its hard for me 
to concentrate on one thing at a time,  so throwing Packet into the fray is 
like throwing an anchor to a drowning man....

I'll take my chances SOLO again this year!!!!

So Doug, if I have to duke it out with you on QRP, be gentle with me, I 
only
have small antennas -- low to the ground and a PEE-WEAK signal. he he he...

See ya in the SS & CQCW

John K1RC (ex K1CGJ)
35 mi NW of Boston
________________________________________________________________________  
_______
From: Doug KR2Q on Thu, Oct 30, 1997 23:46
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Allow Packet for everyone!
To: cq-contest at contesting.com

In a message dated 97-10-30 05:59:04 EST, N5TJ wrote:

<< >I haven't seen where the use of packet in assisted
 >categories has enabled an assisted single operator to have a higher
 >score than an unassisted operator in the box scores.

 Old subject, Ken. It has in some cases. IMHO it SHOULD in ALL CASES
 given EQUAL operators, stations and propagation. It's only logical. >>

Well, I agree with Jeff that there has been at least once exception to the 
SO
ALLOWS WINS OVER SOA "rule."  However, I do NOT agree that having packet 
would
raise the scores of the SO guys.  I do NOT think it is logical.  This 
assumes
that grabbing multipliers is of paramount importance to winning and this
SIMPLY IS NOT THE CASE!  Anyone who has studied/followed the results over 
the
years (and as DOCUMENTED IN WRITING in the last CQWW results) QSO'S are 
what
win the contest, NOT multipliers.

So if you are at a TOP GUN station with 2 radios and can work the spotted 
mult
on 1 or 2 calls, then perhaps you might increase your score.  But for the
MAJORITY of op's, tracking down packet spots (mults) simply means that you 
are
NOT running (even if by the S+P method).  Even QRP, I can S+P for ANY qso's 
at
60/hour...that's QRP (yes, I know...from the East Coast).

The point is, that spending time in a PACKET-PILEUP is a big WASTE of time 
if
you're interested in improving your score.  Sure, it's a thrill to work a 
new
mult, but at what price?

All you guys should STOP guessing about it, and LOOK AT THE RESULTS....you
couldn't ask for any better PROOF and it's all there in black and white!

de Doug KR2Q





--
CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com