[CQ-Contest] AN OPEN LETTER TO THE CQ CONTEST COMMITTEE

[Alfred Frugoli]

Bill,

Again, really?  I'm not buying it in either theory, or looking at the mult
totals.  For a top SOSB entrant, I would expect to see totals similar to a
MM because just like a MM, a SOSB entrant can be on that band for 48 hours
straight, working the weird short small openings that are not worth a SOAB
entrant chasing.  In fact, the chart I just posted on my blog (
http://wp.me/pdJH2-1y) using CQWW SSB 2007 results shows that the world
winner SOSB entrants (who cannot use assistance) matched or beat the world
winner MM (who can use assistance) in mults.  In reverse, I don't see the
SOAB being able to chase all those weird openings on all 6 contest bands and
still be able to keep the rate up on the primary band.  I don't believe that
SOAB mult totals will ever rival those of SOAB or MM entries, even with lots
of assistance.  Big MM stations have all 6 bands going during many hours of
the contest.  Unless we start having SO6R stations, we're not going to see
SOAB mult totals at the level of MM entrants.

I also don't believe that "assistance" really helps you increase your score.
 I think it does help you increase your DXCC and WAZ totals.  Unless you've
got the antenna farm that KC1XX, K3LR or W3LPL have, once it's on packet,
you're too late, you're fighting the pile, not working the mult on the 1st
call and moving on to keep the rate up.  A local skimmer might make a bigger
difference in the CW part of the event since you're seeing the "spot" before
others who get it on the "cluster", but we already have skimmer spots being
fed into the cluster network.

73 de Al, KE1FO

-----
Check out my Amateur Radio Contesting blog at ke1fo.wordpress.com.


On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 6:58 AM, Bill Tippett <btippett at alum.mit.edu> wrote:

>
> N6TJ wrote:
>
>  > (3) Of course, major crutches like packet and skimmers will make all
> past
>  > records null and void.  Single Operator - Assisted multiplier totals
> will
>  > soon rival those of the Multi-multi submittals.
>
>
> KE1FO replied:
>
>  > Really?
>  > Seems like the numbers show that for the most part you're going to work
> the
> most mults by working the most q's, which you don't do when you're hunting
> down mults on packet.  And even if you do work more mults by using packet,
> you won't work as many q's as the unassisted guy.
>
>          Jim is correct about **multiplier** totals, although there
> is some truth in your latter comment regarding total score.  I speak
> from personal experience in several SOSB/10 entries where a
> competitor consistently had 10m multiplier totals rivalling
> KC1XX/W3LPL/K3LR (N6TJ's premise).  Even with that assistance, I was
> still able to beat him because of more QSO points.  He was later
> reclassified to SOA (or totally removed) once the log checkers were
> on to him.  It doesn't take rocket science to know something is fishy
> when an "unassisted" single op posts multiplier totals close to the Big 3.
>
>         However, I do believe it would be easy to augment scores
> using spots only for rare mults.  It would still require experience
> to know which might be worthy of chasing rather than simply having
> them come to you.
>
>                                 73,  Bill  W4ZV
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>