[CQ-Contest] Category hopping

David Gilbert xdavid at cis-broadband.com
Mon Dec 7 13:39:00 EST 2015

Personally, I don't see the problem here.  It seems to me that the 
category you qualify for doesn't have anything to do with what you 
started out to be, or what you told somebody (other than the contest 
sponsor) you were after the contest ... but instead is based upon what 
you actually did during the contest and what you officially submitted to 
the contest sponsor.  I find it odd that every other discussion here on 
this reflector ends with what falls within the contest rules ... except 
this one.  If you qualify for more than one category you should have the 
option to choose which one within the window that the contest sponsor 
gives you.

And how is it "sneaky" that somebody waits until the last minute to 
submit their score and doesn't bother to submit to 3830?  That makes 
zero sense to me.  If somebody wants to tip their hand regarding the 
category for which they intend to submit, that's their choice.  3830 
seems to me to be somewhat of an anachronism now anyway for contests 
that require official submissions to be made within a matter of days.  
There isn't even any requirement that posts to 3830 be accurate.   I 
could imagine stations posting inflated scores to drive off a 
competitor, or posting deflated scores to bait somebody into that 
category before they switch.  Now THAT might be considered sneaky ... 
but still has nothing to do with violating any contest rules.

I too have a great distaste for what the M-S and M/2 categories have 
become, since I think they pervert the original intent to have 
categories for smaller operations, but that's a different argument. And 
at the moment, the contest sponsors haven't done anything about it and 
they are still legal.   For some stations, a great part of the appeal 
for those categories is how creative they can get stretching the rules 
via technical methods.  I can understand that, but I still think it's 
unfortunate how it disenfranchises the smaller stations those categories 
were originally meant to serve.

Dave  AB7E

On 12/6/2015 9:22 PM, Jeff Clarke wrote:
> I feel bad for the guys at PJ2T because this has happened to them before. I was happy for them because I thought they pulled out a victory in MM after trying for years. Plus they are my friends.
> It's interesting to me that the guys in question who switched categories from Multi-2 has won that category for the last 8 years. Their streak was going to be broken by D4C this year.
>   I have to tell you I have a bad taste in my mouth about what the Mult-Single and Multi-2 categories have become. The winners are really setup as a Mult-Multi's with lockout's that prevent them from transmitting more than one signal on a band at the same time.  Most of them have at least 8-10 operators or more. I don't think this is what CQ envisioned these categories to be when they were first created.
> I also don't see how the CQ log checkers could even tell if these entries some how slipped up with their lockout's and transmitted more than one signal on a band unless they listened to a SDR recording of every contact they made. I pretty sure they don't have the resources to do this because it's a volunteer organization.
> It's also noteworthy that there were several M2X entries who didn't submit their scores to 3830 until Friday, when the logs were due. Were they just sitting back and waiting to see what their competition had done and massaged their logs?
> I mean come on... If you are so technical to build complex lockout's and narrow bandpass filters you can't submit your score to 3830 immediately after the contest like everyone else does? Sorry but that sounds sneaky to me.
> Jeff KU8E / PJ4A team
> _______________________________________________
> 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