[CQ-Contest] Competing in the Daylight

David Robbins K1TTT k1ttt at arrl.net
Tue Oct 11 20:49:47 EDT 2005

You must have a short memory... think back, way back, before packet
pileups... what caused pileups back then??  easy, two stations call, a third
hears them and calls, then another hears the extra racket and gets in on the
flurry... and it builds and builds, even if the station underneath isn't all
that interesting sometimes.  I had a guest come here one time who just
wanted to have some fun and warm up on cw for a contest... during the day,
he got on and without giving his call just started sending reports as fast
as he could to no one... soon someone called, then another, and another, so
he started sending reports to them, and more called, and more, after 10
minutes he turned the keyer speed up as fast as it would go and id'ed and
send qsl via .... and went right on working the pileup... not only weren't
there any packet spots for him, but no one even knew who they were working.
So just because someone shows up in a pileup doesn't mean they are using
packet, maybe you got a couple extra calls which happened to attract the
attention of someone else and built your pileup.

David Robbins K1TTT
e-mail: mailto:k1ttt at arrl.net
web: http://www.k1ttt.net
AR-Cluster node: 145.69MHz or telnet://dxc.k1ttt.net

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com [mailto:cq-contest-
> bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of N7MAL
> Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 14:03
> To: K1AR at aol.com; cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Competing in the Daylight
> I received 17, yes 17, private emails asking me to name names. Well for
> obvious reasons I am not going to do that but I wanted to respond publicly
> to at least this one, because I found it interestingly offensive. As you
> can see it comes from someone who has gained a certain amount of stature
> in the contesting community.
> John said:"""".
> Over the last few years I've complained often and loudly about being
> spotted during domestic contests, especially SS. I've watched my run-rate
> go from something very comfortable to having a big pile-up. Without
> exception my run-rate jumped up because I was spotted on packet. AND
> without exception checking the results, against my log during those rapid
> rate increases, shows none, not one, of the stations worked during those
> periods reported themselves as a muli-op. They ALL were in the single op
> category. If it happened once, or maybe even twice, it might be
> coincidence but over several contests it is no longer coincidence but
> cheating.
> If you need further 'proof' look at CQP. There were hundreds and hundreds
> of spots on the cluster. Other than the big multi efforts in CA there will
> be less than a dozen claim they were multi. It's the same during other
> domestic contests like SS and NAQP except on a larger scale. The ratio of
> spots/spotters to logs submitted as multi would be laughable if it weren't
> for the fact that it clearly shows there is a problem of integrity during
> contests.
> John might I suggest rather than taking cheap pot-shots at the messenger
> why not help find a solution to this problem. Is there not a way to make
> the multi category more attractive? There must be some incentive, bigger
> or more trophies, larger or more bold fonts in results, something to move
> the folks who are using packet, during contests, into the multi category.
> Hopefully a solution can be found that will satisfy everyone.
> Best 73's
> MAL         N7MAL
> http://www.ctaz.com/~suzyq/N7mal.htm
> http://geocities.com/n7mal/
> Don't worry about the world coming to an end today.
> It's already tomorrow in Australia
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: K1AR at aol.com
>   Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 12:59
>   Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Competing in the Daylight
>   In a message dated 10/9/2005 7:19:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> N7MAL at CITLINK.NET writes:
>     It is easy to see that Packet-Cluster cheating is rampant and is a
> real threat to honest contesting.
>   Mal--
>   With all due respect, you're out of your league with this comment. Can
> you identify a single entrant that fits your cheating assertion above? I
> doubt it, but I'd like to see your list.
>   Be careful with these claims that are not fact based. The reality is
> that, at least for the CQ WW and ARRL DX contests, packet cheaters are
> aggressively sought out, discovered and dealt with appropriately.
>   Please reply.
>   73 John, K1AR
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list