[CQ-Contest] Follow-up on Cheaters
mladenbogdanov at yahoo.com
Thu Jul 19 04:22:36 PDT 2012
To win M/S with one radio?....yeah..maybe 40 years ago!
It seems P33W is on the line again!!?
To satisfy all those big egos with one radio,i suggest AUU&gang to dismantle all those
towers & hardware, put up w3dzz + ft200, and move back to paper and pencil!
Funny thing is, they are going to win anyway!
My 0.02 $.
73,Mladen YT6W ( few times M/S crew member @ K1LZ with 6 radios).
From: Tree <tree at kkn.net>
To: cq-contest at contesting.com
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2012 1:43 AM
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Follow-up on Cheaters
Thanks for all the advice and ideas (both on the list and off).
Sorry - I will not name names here on this forum. However, here is what I
am doing so you are aware:
- The sponsor (the ARRL) has been notified of what we heard - and they are
working the issue to collect more data.
- Once they have good data - AND the log is submitted - then they can
present the data to the offending station and ask for an explanation.
Obviously - if someone submits their log as a check log (or not at all) -
there is nothing wrong with what they are doing (at least form the
perspective of the contest rules). So - in a way - this is peer pressure.
Someone out there did this - they probably know they did it - and they
know that the ARRL knows who they are. Perhaps they will think twice about
how they submit their log. Also - by not naming names - if there are two
or more people out there who did this - all of them will go thought this
It is possible that this was a "one off mistake" - and with an appropriate
explanation - perhaps the situation can be salvaged. However, we don't
know that yet.
This whole situation has been a bit of an eye opener for me. It is crazy
how big some of these multi-singles have gotten. Harry, RA3AUU, sent me a
video of a multi-single operation in the WPX CW contest at P33W that is on
you tube. It shows what appears to be a functioning interlock - so the
station is legal per the contest rules - but instead of this being a
multi-single - there are four radios being used at the same time by four
operators. This is likely very different from what most people think
multi-single is. I can understand the confusion since the words "single
transmitter" are used in the category. Of course - the CQ contests allow a
multiplier radio - so perhaps this is only twice as big as you might
I applaud Harry on his engineering skills - and certainly he has figured
out how to get the most points within the rules. I understand there are a
number of other big stations like this operating the contest. However, it
is clear to me that this isn't what most of the other multi-singles look
like. So - we end up with two kinds of multi-singles... the ones that can
pull off this type of operation - and the rest of us who have one radio and
two or three people who want to operate the contest. The difference in the
results speak for themselves if you look at the multi-single scores.
I don't know if there is anything that should be done about this.
Certainly it is interesting to see how far these things can go and stay
within the rules. However, at some point, we might want to think about the
effect this has overall on the category and if it discourages too many
people from participating in the contest because they have no hope of being
competitive with just a "single" transmitter. Personally - I think it
would be better to get this back to a more simple configuration and open up
the category to more people. It's pretty easy to see in the logs when two
frequencies are being used to CQ since frequency information is provided in
a large percentage of the logs these days. Perhaps that is something that
could be regulated. I find that we have enough QRM on the bands without
having stations taking up two frequencies.
Food for thought and discussion.
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com
More information about the CQ-Contest