[CQ-Contest] Becoming a better operator? A TEST!

[Robert Shohet]

It is always insightful and amusing (and sometimes annoying) to read new
posts on old topics.  I have always been a believer in the "scientific
method", that is, when an assumption is made, it should be tested to see if
it is valid.

I think it was W5GN who talked about "throwing money at towers and
equipment", the implication being that this was enough to improve the
station and contest scores.

Rather that simply reject this notion out of hand as silly, I decided to be
objective and fair and use my training (B.S. in Nutritional Biochemistry
from Cornell University) as a scientist, to test this theory.

Experiment 1:

Method:

I walked out to the base of my 130' tower, opened my wallet, took out all
the paper money, $187, and threw it at the base of the tower.

Result:

No change in the station, except the tower base now had wet money.
No change in signal strength.  Operator felt wet and somewhat relieved**.

Experiment 2:

Method:

I picked up the wet money and proceeded inside my house.  I used a paper
towel to dry off the money and then proceeded into the basement where the
shack is located.

I took the same $187 (now dry) and threw it on the operating desk, on top of
the computer keyboard.

Result:

No change in the station or signal strength.  Again, you can imagine my
relief!**  My curious 4 1/2 year old daughter who was watching this process,
asked "Daddy, why did you throw that (money) there?"  I replied that I was
doing a scientific test.  She then asked me "Daddy what is a scientific
test?".

Conclusion:

Based on my experiments, which in the interests of advancing scientific
theory and practice, should be repeated in large numbers by contesters all
over the world, and THEN subject to confidence testing using the accepted
Chi 2 (Chi Squared) method, I have concluded that throwing money at towers
and equipment does NOTHING to improve the station or signal strength, or
operator ability.

You can just imagine my GREAT RELIEF** that there was more to being a good
operator and making good contest scores than just throwing money at these
things.

As additional proof of my conclusion, I offer the following:

Several years ago I decided that it would be in my best interest to build in
automatic band switching since I make many HUNDREDS of qso's every contest
on the second radio.  It is terribly fatiguing and time-wasting to have to
switch everything MANUALLY.  So I spent the money and bought the appropriate
equipment from Top-Ten devices.  But I never hooked it up, and still haven't
as of April 3, 2004, so I STILL have to switch everything manually.  UGH!
Now, if W5GN's theory was correct, then just the fact that I purchased this
equipment should have improved my station, but of course we know that this
is NOT true, since equipment that is not plugged in and not hooked up, can't
possibly be used to increase one's score.

Ok, back to reality....

It is VERY wet in Connecticut since it has been raining for the last five
days.  There are some who would claim that bad weather could affect the
results of my tests.  They may be right.  It certainly affected the texture
of the money and the interest of vendors in receiving it.  "Hey what is this
s__t you handed me?!!".  Oops, that was Long Island, NOT Connecticut.    :-)

There may even be some doubters out there of the validity of my scientific
tests.  I can just hear it now....

You dummy, don't you know that throwing money at towers and equipment only
works on SUNNY days?  Or,

Hey nut-job, your location is already so good (Eastern half of the US) that
the enhancement is valid only from WEST of the Mississippi?, Or,

Hey lid, don't you know that INCREASING contest scores is a function of
IMPROVING YOUR SKILL AND STRATEGY, and/or IMPROVING the design and
efficiency of your equipment and antennas and/or MOVING to a better station
location, or some combination of ALL OF THESE THINGS?

Hmmmm....  That last one implies lots of work and effort!    I suspect that
it MIGHT be true but I just don't know.  Guess I will have to do ANOTHER
scientific test.   Any suggestions?

73
Bob KQ2M