[CQ-Contest] Ban all contest spotting?

[Scott Currier]

I have to agree with that statement. I remember the early days when spotting was done on 2 meters and was local. Worked great and it still looks the same on the internet. Hey if it works, don't fix it. 

I think though that the greatest advance in contesting was the computer. Computer logging, computer logging with CAT to get frequency data from the radio, DVK's, CW sent by computer, and now all of that combined with spots. All made possible by the computer. 

If you had your choice in a contest, you could use spots or computer logging with CAT. Which would help you out the most? Thought so, forget the spots, give me the electronic logging. 

So, why are spots getting the bad rap?

Spots give you situational awareness. You still need to work the stations. You still need to get through the pileups, you still need to do everything you normally do, the only thing that changes is the order that you work the stations and how many stations you work. 

Spots do not guarantee a contact, they do not schedule a contact, and they usually make it tougher to get through to a station because others are likely to be calling as a result of the spot. 

There are plusses and minuses. 

Many people prefer to not use spots because of the minuses. 

Therefore, I think the best thing to do is to optimize the spotting system to get as many spots as possible and to increase accuracy. People who want to use spotting can, those who don't, don't have to. 


Besides spotting is an example of people trying to help each other out. 


So, who would rather have the spots instead of electronic logging? 

Raise your hand. 

Hmmmmmmmmmmm, don't see anyone yet. 


73 all. 

Scott KT1B

Haverhill, MA

















> Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 12:48:09 -0700
> From: n2icarrl at gmail.com
> To: CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Ban all contest spotting?
> 
> Paul O'Kane wrote:
> 
> >> People use packet for various reasons.  Some are looking for new DXCC
> >> counters.  Some are trying to maximize the score they contribute to their
> >> club.  Some just use it to have fun.
> > 
> > Yes - the use of non amateur-radio communications technologies may be quite
> > OK for people who want to have fun, or increase their DXCC counters, but it
> > is inappropriate at all times for contesters who submit logs.
> 
> Being the devil's advocate, your argument of "non amateur-radio communications" 
> is off-base.
> 
> Step back in time to the early 90's. No public internet back then. Packet was in 
> full swing, with VHF packet clusters in every USA metropolitan area. Many of the 
> clusters were linked together, using VHF, UHF and even HF links. Looked just 
> like the DX spotting we currently have, and was 100% amateur-radio 
> communications technology.
> 
> 73,
> Steve, N2IC
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft's powerful SPAM protection.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141664/direct/01/
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141664/direct/01/