[CQ-Contest] Fwd: Category hopping

Tom Osborne w7why at frontier.com
Mon Dec 7 21:21:46 EST 2015

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck........

> Jeff & all,
> can somebody help me, please? Seems I just don't get it ...
> How do you know how they operated? Have you been there? Did you ask 
> them? How do you know if their 3830 report has not been wrong (i.e. 
> they accidentally chose M/2 as reporting category instead of M/M 
> because they did so for the last 8 years or so)? What does a packet 
> spot analysis tell you? Yes, maybe they were only running on 2 bands 
> in parallel. Do you know if they didn't do mult chasing on the other 
> bands at the same time? How do you know if they did not have any 
> technical problems and/or transmitted on 3 or more bands at the same 
> time (interlock problems during mult chasing, etc.)? Wouldn't you 
> expect them to change to M/M then (if they ever started as M/2 before) 
> to still comply with the rules and not risk a DQ? Wouldn't that be a 
> perfect example of playing integer? Questions upon questions ...
> Besides the M/M rules state: "The six contest bands *may* be activated 
> simultanously." Re-read it. It does not say "must be activated". If 
> you use 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 or 6 stations is certainly up to you, available 
> equipment, available OPs, a.s.o.
> Certainly a few things to think about before starting bad calls at 
> guys who seem to have played perfectly by the rules. And please don't 
> compare that to UT5UGR last year. He did not play by the rules. That's 
> why he got DQ'd, easy as that. Not the case here!
> Don't get me wrong. I do not argue because I might be biased as a 
> German (I do not even know most of the OPs at CR3L) but because of 
> missing fairness in the current discussion. You expect guys to play by 
> the rules. They did (as far as we know). So what's wrong here? Why are 
> you asking them for self-defence? All perfectly legal ...
> 73, Olli - DH8BQA

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list