[CQ-Contest] packet cheaters caught?

[andrew]

In message <93C6F6B4CBF6D2119EDB00805F9F2C8158C645 at lp-pdc.lpc.com>,
Gilmer, Mike <mgilmer at gnlp.com> writes

>One way to detect packet assistance is to look at busted callsigns.
>However, even this is troubling.  If one guy can bust the call one way
>(mixing up S and H on CW), it's easy for another guy to bust it the same
>way.  Perhaps the powers that be have more "devious" means...

It's difficult to prove the S v H scenario (most people bust that at
some time!).  An easier way is to look at all the people who busted a
call in a less obvious manner around the same time period.  As an
example, in CQWW CW last year, according to my UBN report, three people
busted GI0KOW as GI4KOW, all on 10M, and all within my long run there,
so most probably on the same frequency.  

I haven't checked if these guys are claiming Unassisted, but there is a
fair (but not 100% certain) chance that they were using packet.  A
deciding factor would be if they bust a number of callsigns this way.
 
Andrew Williamson GI0NWG / AC6WI
Homepage = http://www.gi0nwg.freeserve.co.uk/

One of the ZL9CI gang
http://www.qsl.net/zl9ci/


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


>From Igor Sokolov" <ua9cdc at dialup.mplik.ru  Sat Sep  9 00:36:28 2000
From: Igor Sokolov" <ua9cdc at dialup.mplik.ru (Igor Sokolov)
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2000 05:36:28 +0600
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Re: penalty
References: <61.6edca3d.26e94dcf at aol.com>
Message-ID: <004a01c019ed$a0144380$c6a0fea9 at dialup.mplik.ru>


> >  But, to remove 3 QSOs per busted call is fair (though we
> >  may not like it) because the rule applies to all.
>
> The rule applies to all, but doesn't affect all equally.
skip
> Which is all a part of contest stragegy,

Correct. Penalty is just one more variable in the contest that makes it more
complicated (and therefore interesting) for those who wants it to be more
complicated.

> except that the winning strategy
> becomes one of only working the signals big enough to be certain about.

That may be true if you are head and shoulders better then others. If that
is close competition you will be forced to work weak stations to win.

> This is significant because of lot of the folks who get on for a DX
contest
> are motivated to do so by the chance to work "good DX" (by their
definition)
> and are willing to work the less rare stuff just for something to do while
> looking for the real DX. A lot of the "good" stuff falls into the second
> category above.  If such a DX station is encouraged to avoid these little
> folks rather than risk an error, the value of contests to these casual
> operators will decrease,  resulting in less activity, less fun, and a
harder
> time to justify the use of the spectrum for a contest.

Those motivated by the chance to work "good DX" are not worried about
penalties and strategy and risk to make an error. All they are interested in
is just to get a confirmation from the DX or say Hello to old friends.
Penalty for inaccuracy sometimes help to equalise the difference in power
and antenna set-up and let operators with inferior set-up to compete with
"brute force" type of participants.
IMO the most interesting continuation of every contest is the feedback in
the form of UBNs and checked logs. I wish CQWW would put all the logs and
UBNs on the WEB without  personal access codes so that anyone can review
logs of any of the competitors,  make some conclusions, learn about the
winning strategy, decide for themselves who is cheating and who is really
good operator. That is the way it is done nowadays in our internal contests
and such a transparency is really motivating for many of us. Things like
calculated accuracy sometimes seen as the sign of a good operator, and the
combination of total score, accuracy and the description of the set-up used
can tell you a lot more then just the final result.


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