[CQ-Contest] The Lesser Gods a/k/a SOAB(A)

[Frank Hunt]

Very well said Franki.

Some people may find the following of interest.

1) There are about 30 international contests each year that I try to 
participate in. (So far this year I've operated in 20 of them)

2) Of these 30 contests, 10 don't permit packet assistance for SO class but 
4 do have a SO-Assisted class

3) The 10 contests that don't permit packet assistance for SO class are:
ARRL RTTY
ARRL DX
ARRL 10m
IARU (ARRL run)
CQ WW CW
CQ WW RTTY
CQ WPX CW
SCC RTTY
SAC CW
Commonwealth 

4) Yes 7 of the 10 are ARRL/CQ run contests. Strangely enough the odd man 
out is the CQ WPX RTTY, which does permit packet assistance.

5) The other 20 contests that I'm interested in, are all run by non-US 
based organisations.

Conclusions?

73, Frank ZL2BR (ZM2B)

On 18 Dec 2007 at 9:48, Franki ON5ZO wrote:

> > Doesn't it make an Assited Category look like "handicapped"?
> > Could it be one of the reasons for cheating?
> 
> It shouldn't be a reason to cheat because no reason justifies cheating but
> indeed you'd get the impression that "assisted" seems to be equal to
> "lazy-bum-inferior-operator-couldn't-work-a-mult-if-he-called-you" looking
> at the points Yuri VE3DZ summed up. Not just by these points posted only
> yesterday but some die-hard UNassisted operators always seem to let that
> slip through. Not litterally but between the lines. And maybe they're just
> being diplomatic when posting here or in their blogs. At least, that's the
> feeling I've been having since I got involved in contesting in 2001. Don't
> ask me to come up with specific statements or quotes because I can't give
> you any - it's just an accumulated feeling I got over the years.
> 
> I don't use packet when the rules don't allow (like EUHFC). However I like
> to be assisted when the rules allow and submit as such both on 3830 and to
> the contest sponsor. I like SOAB(A) because my location and setup don't
> allow top scores in DX contests. Hence my main competitor is... yours truly.
> I like to improve my score and QSO totals - big QSO numbers is what I like.
> Packet helps me to achieve that. Still I sit in my chair 24h, 36/48 or as
> many hours out of 48 as my mind and body allow. So am I lazy? I don't think
> so. Am I a lesser oparator? You decide. It's not that I sat here for 40
> hours in CQ WW CW clicking my bandmap +2700 times hopping from QSO to QSO.
> You'd see my UBN go bananas then! And I also move mults from band to band
> and if someone asks me to move I do - mult or not. Assisted is the same as
> unassisted, just differently.
> 
> We shouldn't forget that:
> a) Contesting should be fun no matter how much money, work, blood, sweat
> (and tears?) we put into it. What is there to win by winning? Oh yes, us
> Contester's Ego... I plea guilty on this one. b) The vast majority of us
> shouldn't be bothered or punished because of the occasional rotten apple in
> the basket. Find the cheaters, hunt 'm down, DQ 'm - I think it IS possible
> with the means available right now and without extra measures. c) That QSO
> rate that we like to see go sky high is mostly boosted by the casual
> operator doing spot hopping. Ban cluster = cut 50% of our QSO totals? Don't
> forget that when people see 8P, P4, ZD, V4 etc spotted they're eager to go
> and work him/her for DXCC credit. I wish the same was true for ON. Don't
> trust the casual DXer to tune the bands himself.
> 
> > Sometimes people would like to enter the contest in old fashoined way -
> > just as "a guy and his radio" (boy, I loved this!), but sometimes same
> > people would love to use technology, so why the difference in this
> > category is so unfair?
> 
> Indeed, that's my bottom line: if there actually *ARE* 2 categories why not
> treat them equally? Both in the final score publishing as well as among
> peers?
> 
> 73 de Franki ON5ZO = OQ5M 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest