[CQ-Contest] Dumbing-Down Contests?

[Ron Notarius W3WN]

But... the problem per se with the exchange (if any) is not the cut number, but the misuse/abuse of them.

So we dump the exchange to a more generic, easier, less meaningful one... to avoid problems with people who don't know how to use cut numbers?

How does that jive with the statement "While the basic format of major contests should not change..."

The problem being addressed here is not a technological one.  Changing from a numeric exchange (or K or KW) for power to a more generic one representing entry class is not a tehcnological issue... except, if anything, to make it EASIER to program into a good logging application.

Cut numbers do not demonstrate a problem per se with the exchange.  They demonstrate a problem with some contesters.  Changing the exchange doesn't fix the problem, merely avoids it while creating additional problems as an unintended consequence.

The ARRL DX Contest Exchange for DX Stations:  It ain't broke... or if you will, it's not what's broken in the contest.  DON'T FIX IT.

73

From: Tom Taormina <Tom at k5rc.cc>
Date: 2008/02/22 Fri AM 09:24:52 CST
To: cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Dumbing-Down Contests?

Dumbing-down contests. Now there is an oxymoron. Contest exchanges have
pushed the envelope of technology with prefill files, exchange guessing and
embedded log entries in contest programs. K5ZD's super-check partial files
provide likely call signs in contests. What we have been doing since the
invention of the electronic keyer is ADVANCING the art of contesting through
technology. While the basic format of major contests should not change (for
consistency of the objectives) technology improvement is never ending and
advances contesting just as it advances our daily lives. My station held
many CQ WW M/S records during the 80's. Since computers, the "record" 3.7Meg
scores would not even place in the top ten these days.

 

When we invented NAQP we left out the useless signal report, yet it still
remains in many contest exchanges. In the FOC Marathon and in VHF contests,
accurate reports are still given and logged. If copying accuracy is your
forte, the SS and WPX are for you. If rapid exchanges and band-change
strategy are more fun for you, the CQ WW and ARRL DX should be high on your
list.

 

Cut numbers are a symptom in ARRL CW that the DX exchange sucks and is ripe
for change. They are not clever tools for operator skills enhancement.

 

Tom Taormina, K5RC
Virginia City NV
 <http://www.k5rc.cc> www.k5rc.cc

FOC 1760
NACHO-W7RN RANN-K7RC

 

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest