[CQ-Contest] WRTC Spot/Log Correlation

[Barry]

It is very rare to see a disqualification in CQWW results.  Do they 
simply reclassify stations to the "correct" category or simply not 
publish their scores in the results?  A listing with explanation would 
be more of a deterrent. 
73,
Barry

Tonno Vahk wrote:
> Fabian's work demonstrates that it is fairly easy to find packet cheaters 
> among the top contestants in big contests like CQWW. Actually you can do a 
> lot more than just checking the 5, 10 etc minute windows. You also have 
> frequencies! If not in the station's log then with the spots. CQ committee 
> has developed very fine ways to track down cheaters and disqualifing a known 
> cheater OE4A as claimed EU SO AB HP champion in 2005 SSB clearly shows that 
> the times to get away with this are over. You can be very smart trying to 
> work spots at 11th minute (if you think CQ committe is using 10 minute check 
> period) or mess around with QSO times in your log. Still, if your log gets 
> highlighted and carefully analysed you can't get away.
>
> So that actually makes the discussion of whether we should have assisted or 
> non-assisted classes in contests or just one class for all much less 
> important. There are contests for both and that is very fine. It is great to 
> work contests like Russian DX for a change where cluster is allowed for all. 
> RDXC is a great contest by all means. But SO in CQWW is really the biggest 
> challenge and those 48 hours just on your own without any other link to 
> outside world than your two radios is uncomparable to anything else.
>
> With great confidence we can look in to the future of top SO AB contesting 
> in EU now knowing that the playing field will be fair and I am also sure 
> that there will be some clean up in Monoband classes in the coming years.
>
> It is maybe a bit too harsh to condemn some of the guys in Fabian list as 
> what they might have been after was maybe just trying to work as much WRTC 
> stations and help the contest not really win IARU. So posting as Single Op 
> might have been unintentional really. Somebody who really tried to win IARU 
> would not have spent too much time with WRTC stations anyway. But we look 
> forward to the day when CQWW logs are disclosed the same way and this 
> analysis would really look interesting and appropriate then.
>
> 73
> tonno
> es5tv
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Igor Sokolov" <ua9cdc at r66.ru>
> To: <mail at fkurz.net>; <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 4:02 PM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WRTC Spot/Log Correlation
>
>
> Fabian,
> Thanks for the great job. Each country should know it's  cheaters.
> You just set up one more example of how much good can be gained by
> publishing contest logs in the internet.
> It would not only be educational but would also serve as a great tool to
> track cheaters.
>
> 73, Igor UA9CDC
>
>
> Hello,
>
> thanks to the policy of the WRTC 2006 to make all logs public and
> thus offering a data pool of about 85000 QSOs, it is possible to
> generate a lot of interesting statistics.
>
> By using the data from all 46 WRTC logs and the spots from the
> OH2AQ-Database for all WRTC-Stations, I generated an analysis of
> correlation of DX spots of WRTC stations, and the appearance of
> callsigns in the WRTC logs shortly after. Combining this with the
> claimed categories according to the official list of submitted
> logs raises some questions if some people submitted in the right
> category. Remember: Single OPs are not allowed to use spotting
> networks in IARU.
>
> The results of the analysis, along with all raw data and the source
> code used to generate it can be found here:
>
> http://dl0tud.tu-dresden.de/~dj1yfk/wrtc/analysis.shtml
>
> Looking forward to hear any opinions...
>
> 73,
> --
> Fabian Kurz, DJ1YFK * Dresden, Germany * http://fkurz.net/
> Online log: http://dl0tud.tu-dresden.de/~dj1yfk/log.html
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
> --
> Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo sistema de antivírus e
>  acredita-se estar livre de perigo.
>
> --
> Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo sistema de antivírus e
>  acredita-se estar livre de perigo.
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest 
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>   

-- 

Barry Kutner, W2UP             
Newtown, PA