[CQ-Contest] Scourges of Contesting, Chapter One

[Rick Tavan]

Huh? So I guess baseball would be more popular if the players wore masks 
and the announcer said things like "It's a sharp grounder to I Don't 
Know ... underhanded toss to What, Out ... back to Who, DOUBLE PLAY!!"  
Or, without relying on Abbott and Costello for cheap humor, how about 
"Ball contact by Player A, fielded by Player B ... relayed to Players C 
and D. Inning over." I don't know if my heart could stand the excitement.

Sure, real callsigns at WRTC would have allowed non-competitors to 
influence the outcome. And in a contest designed to level the playing 
field, that would have been a problem. But in more typical contest 
situations, I ask "So what?" Sure, people do influence the outcomes of 
their friends by spotting them, working them, sending attaboys and more, 
even without scoreboards. And member recruitment influences the outcome 
of club competitions. And voters influence the outcome of elections in 
most jurisdictions.  Unfair advantages? What else is new? We compete in 
an inherently unfair sport and only the whiners care. Everyone else 
knows how to discount high scores from favorable locations and how to 
admire lower scores from more difficult ones.

Scoreboards could make contests more interesting, more challenging and 
more fun ... not more equal.

/Rick N6XI

Kenneth E. Harker wrote:

>The reason the scoreboard worked at WRTC 2002 was
>that there were anonymous callsigns involved.  Will
>this be done for every contest?
>