[CQ-Contest] Re: NAQP name handicap experiment

Matt aa7bg at 3rivers.net
Sat Jan 18 09:34:28 EST 2003

I could be wrong, but I believe using hard names was born out of a strategy
to use "defense" instead of just "offense" in the realm of contesting.

Most contest operators use an offensive strategy primarily. That is to say,
the operator marches the ball down the field and increases his score by
running stations or S&Ping. The operator doesn't really have a whole lot to
do with what his competition is doing. However, by using a hard name, it
actually does slow down the copying station and therefore can be seen as a
defensive strategy.

I'm not sure this is why the whole issue came up in the first place, but it
seems plausible to me. I really doubt it works and maybe the real reason was
not this at all, but just a desire to be humorous.

Of course, there are other defensive maneuvers that take place in
contesting, but they are illegal. e.g. jamming, stealing freqs, using a hack
saw on your neighbors tower, etc.


-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-admin at contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-admin at contesting.com]On Behalf Of Richard Ferch
Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 11:05 PM
To: cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Re: NAQP name handicap experiment

I really don't understand this fascination with using hard-to-copy names.
The idea in a contest is to complete as many QSOs as possible within the
allotted time, and the best way to do that is to make your exchange as easy
to copy as possible.

If you use an unusual name, let's say for the sake of argument that this
makes each QSO one second longer on average. Between some folks backspacing
over pre-filled names and some asking for repeats, that's probably a
significant underestimate. Over 10 hours in the NAQP, 1 lost second per QSO
would reduce a QSO total of 1200 to 1160, or a 600 QSO total to 580.
Meanwhile, you have cost your opposition an average of 1 second each (plus
the odd busted QSO here and there spread out over the entire field). Exactly
how is that to your benefit?

I have no objection to other people using unexpected names. I'll bet on my
ability to copy unexpected exchanges over a handicap like that any time. But
as for myself, I plan to continue using the same predictable boring name.
I've got no sense of humour, I guess...

plain ol' Rich

    The world's top contesters battle it out in Finland!
 THE OFFICIAL FILM of WRTC 2002 now on professional DVD and VHS!

CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.435 / Virus Database: 244 - Release Date: 12/30/2002

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.435 / Virus Database: 244 - Release Date: 12/30/2002

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list