[CQ-Contest] KILLING THE GOLDEN GOOSE

[Barry]

I guess if K5GO, W0UA and you already know the answers, there is no 
point in doing the survey and soliciting thousands or opinions.

BTW, the WAE hasn't been the same without you...  :-)

Barry W2UP

On 3/17/2013 09:23, Cqtestk4xs at aol.com wrote:
> Both K5GO and W0UA are right on the mark.  Although I have begun to do
> assisted, many (perhaps the majority) of serious contesters do not.  The
> concept of combining both into one category makes no sense to me.
>   
> We want to encourage more participation, not discourage it.  By  passing
> such a rule, it would discourage many of the purists (no packet) from
> operating as is evidenced by the posts on this reflector.  It would also  cut down
> some categories.  Any time you cut the categories you deprive guys  from
> winning a certificate.  That piece of paper on the wall is what  drives many
> guys.  Third place in W4-40 meters low power may not mean much  to the big
> guns, but it means a lot to a little gun who can put that paper on  his wall.
>   
> I stopped operating the WAE when they eliminated the HF bracket and also
> combined all entries into one class whether or not they were assisted or
> not.  Shame, since I was a serious participant and won several of  the "license
> plates" in the 90s.
>   
> Let's not combine the classes, please!  make sure you let the boys at  CQ
> know about this in their survey.
>   
> Bill K4XS/KH7XS
>   
>   
> In a message dated 3/17/2013 3:07:40 P.M. Coordinated Universal Time,
> W0ua at aol.com writes:
>
> KILLING  THE GOLDEN GOOSE
>
>
> I don't do these forum-things as a rule, but my  friend K5GO tipped me
> that
> there was a serious (?) suggestion about  "combining" the SOAB and SO (A)
> categories.  Apparently there  was a survey sent around, but I surely
> wasn't
> aware of it. (As an  aside, I have to wonder how many more like me, who've
> been  in nearly  every major CQ HF Contest over the last several years,
> were
> similarly  unaware this was happening?  How many of those who  received the
> survey  might be "casual" entrants as opposed to serious  SOAB-types?)
> Anyway,
> thanks for the heads-up, Stan, and   I think I've seen enough of the
> discussion to pitch a few marbles  into the ring...
>
> First, "combining" is a nice word that doesn't really  mean what it says in
>   
> this discussion.  What's being put forward  is eliminating the SOAB
> category, in favor of the "Assisted"  category.   I've seen it said  here
> that 33
> percent of the  single-op entries are "Assisted."  I take from  this, then,
> that  66 percent reside in the nominal SOAB category.  That  sounds like a
> pretty healthy majority to me--surely not an anachronism ripe for   the
> scrap
> heap!  I submit that SOAB remains the greatest challenge in  the  contest
> game,
> requiring the highest levels of skill, dedication  and  endurance--which is
> why it attracts so many of those folks for  whom those  qualities are
> valued.
> This catgeory comprises a big share  of the best operators  on this
> planet--who should likewise be  highly-valued by the contest  sponsors!
> So, am I
> getting this  right--that the majority category...the  category with so
> many
> outstanding competitors--the one presenting the highest   challenge--this
> is the
> one we would even consider eliminating?  The  tail  should wag the dog, you
> say?   That can't be right--I  must be missing  something here?
>
> I saw mention made that we  need to get with the "new normal" in
> contesting.
> I'm guessing that this  implies Internet assistance.  Hasn't that already
> been fully  accepted?  As it stands, The "Assisted" category even runs to
> single-band entrants.  33 percent may not be a majority but it is a
> sizable
> group and I think they've been nicely accommodated--there  are clearly lots
> of
> folks who enjoy and prefer this mode--and all the  categories have been
> provided  to support them.  I'm not into  "Assisted" myself, but if it
> floats
> peoples'  boats and gets them on  the air, that's all good.  So, where's
> the
> problem  in all this  that requires kicking nominal SOAB to the curb?
> Again,  I must be missing something here?
>
> I notice that the  subject of cheating comes up in this chat, and with it
> come a couple  of troubling implications:
>
> (1)  That cheating (of the  Internet variety) is taking place among  SOAB
> entrants
>
> (2)  That this purported cheating cannot always be detected  and
> ajudicated
> by the sponsors
>
> Certainly, SOAB is the most  "cheatable" category--I'm sure it does happen.
>   
> That acknowledged,  you can call me naive, but I don't think Internet
> cheating is  either  significant or widespread in the SOAB category.
> But...let's
> just  say for a moment that it was:  Would the proper response  be to
> surrender to  the cheaters and eliminate the mainstream  category because
> it's
> "cheatable?"  I enter SOAB contests  believing that the overwhelming and
> pervasive ethic is for  operating--as I do--on honorable terms.  Further, I
>   trust
> the  sponsors and administrators to protect the integrity of their events
> to
> the very best of their abilities and resources.  I think we have  to
> accept
> some factors as articles-of-faith--and we seem to have a  majority of
> entrants willing to do just that.  Eliminating our  category-of-choice
> seems  a
> rather shabby reward for our trust and  devotion over not just years, but
> decades.
>
> I noticed  one post here which posited that, in effect, this is all just
> about  fun, leisure, relaxation.  Playing 18 holes in the sun on a May
> afternoon is fun.  Fly-fishing in a mountain stream is  leisurely.   That
> is, unless
> you're striving to beat your best  golf score or competing in  stroke-play
> against the club champ.   Or, perhaps you're tracking fish  caught, in a
> friendly game with  your buddies.  If there's competition  involved (even
> with
> yourself), that always seems to add a little urgency to the   proceedings.
> The
> SOAB competition--arguably the toughest, the  most  individualistic test of
> all--is about as "urgent" as it gets  among it's skilled,  dedicated and
> perennial devotees.  Kill  that off while it's still in its  prime and
> you're
> amputating a  healthy limb.  Why would anyone want to do  that?  I must be
> missing something here...
>
>
> Geo   W0UA
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing  list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>