[CQ-Contest] List of WRTC stations / Results /Overspotting and itsimpact

HK3CW cwdude at gmail.com
Tue Jul 13 07:37:10 PDT 2010

I really don't see the impact of cheeleading or overspotting for R36F that 
some made such a big fuzz about...they came in No. 26!.. What great impact? 
Maybe their friends tried to help them but to no avail, it had no impact. At 
the end operator skill won, not spotting or overspotting. Spotting or 
overspotting did not make RW1AC/RA1AIP winners, they did it by themselves. 
Lets no demerit their skills.

73 de HK3CW Rob

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Martin Monsalvo, LU5DX" <lu5dx at yahoo.com>
To: "CQ CONTEST" <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 7:57 AM
Subject: [CQ-Contest] List of WRTC stations / Results /Overspotting and 

> Howdy guys.
> The full list of teams and their R3 callsigns and the WRTC results is 
> available
> at:
> http://ru.wrtc2010.ru/index.php?id=51&idp=46
> The cheerleading or over-spotting of certain stations generated a great 
> deal of
> email traffic on the reflector and outside of it.
> One thing must be clear. The WRTC operators are not responsible at all 
> for
> what’s going on in “the outside world” unless they do something out of the 
> rules
> to identify themselves.
> But the fact is, the spots generated by their friends have a great impact 
> on
> their performance.
> I was listening twenty hours out of the twenty four, and since I was 
> monitoring
> my DTS that was grabbing DX clusters data to generate the hourly spots
> statistics it was WAY VERY noticeable how the traffic increased when a 
> given
> station was spotted. Instantly a nice mini pile up would generate and in 
> spite
> of what has been said here, it was not only of five to ten stations (which
> already has an impact on the overall results considering that the top ten
> stations came in so close from each other. Not to mention the top 
> three!!), but
> these mini pile up lasted from five to ten minutes.
> Also it was said here in the reflector that several stations were heard 
> calling
> CQ with no takers: that is also true! And if you consider the cheerleading 
> the
> impact of the gap it generates is really bad for this stations with no QSO
> traffic.
> This has nothing to do with the recognition the wining team deserves at 
> all.
> They are true champions they are top notch operators, but facts are facts 
> and my
> intentions is only to help if I’m able to help at all to improve for 
> future
> WRTCs.
> To me and to many WRTC 2014 started right after WRTC 2010 ended. So please
> consider this just as data abstracted of who was who and take it as an 
> example
> of something that needs to be worked out for the next Big Event of Ham 
> Radio
> Contesting. That’s it.
> Winning Station 100 DX spots.
> 2nd place Station  86 spots.
> 3rd place Station  86 spots.
> The top station received 16.27% more spots.
> Should credit be taken away from them. Not at all. They were playing by 
> the
> rules.
> Should rules be reviewed to avoid this. Certainly yes. There is a real 
> impact of
> this factor on the competition.
> You may say, well but the third team made more Qs even with fourteen spots 
> less.
> Well, they simply rock just like the other top teams, but that’s not the 
> case.
> Just like the Russians eliminated the factors regarding unequal terrain
> characteristics and unequal antenna set up, it would be simple as great as 
> what
> they did if we can eliminate whatever factors do not help to make WRTC 
> even
> better than it is now.
> All the Russian people did way beyond what everyone could have thought of 
> to
> make the playing field the most leveled ever. They really deserve all our
> recognition for that. From the organizing committee till every single 
> field
> volunteer.
> Vy 73.
> Martin, LU5DX
> www.5bits.net/lu5dx
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list