[CQ-Contest] High Rate Dual Radio CQing

Kelly Taylor ve4xt at mymts.net
Tue Dec 8 22:01:35 EST 2015

Hi Steve,

Confusion over what constitutes assisted exists only in the minds of some operators.

The rules make it pretty clear: outside agencies providing QRG info or local multi-channel decoders providing the same thing. There's no mention of she-who-shall-make-sandwiches, having help building the station, guest-opping at someone else's place or any of the other ludicrous suggestions some folk have dreamt up.

I'm not sure why some want to confuse the issue.

73, kelly

On 2015-12-08, at 6:46 PM, "Stephen Bloom" <sbloom at acsalaska.net> wrote:

> Hey all:
> I agree with this one, though I don't think it will be very popular (and not
> just cuz Eric is my Hebrew Homeboy from Lawn Guyland).  
> The argument over what consists of Assisted is going to become increasingly
> weird, as the line between carbon based neural networks and silicon based
> neural networks narrows :)  If anyone operates unassisted at this point ..it
> is either because
> 1)  The category exists as a separate category with its own
> cert/plaque/trophy/bragging rights during late night beer drinking in a
> suite at the Crowne Plaza 
> 2)  They've been entering SS since radio came back after WW 2 (the Big One)
> and still manually log and dupe check.  You might find a few of these at
> Field Day as well.
> It has been nice having the choice ...and I do have a sentimental attachment
> to being Class A or B for SS, but it seems like the "what exactly does
> assisted mean" argument makes it more trouble than it is worth.  There
> really just is no reason not to use the Cluster or whatever tools come along
> in the future in the age of remoting via IP, Code readers etc.
> As for category shopping ...either decide it's cool or it isn't.  If it is,
> arguing about the limts of it is pointless.  Human nature being what it is
> ..especially when given to competitive engineering types is going to be to
> always push the limits..it's what we do (especially during late night beer
> drinking in a suite at the Crowne Plaza.  If it isn't ...make submitting a
> log a two step entry.  Declare category before the first logged Q
> ..otherwise it's either a check log or automatically in the highest category
> for that contest.  
> Straightforward solutions ..if the problem needs to be solved ..but ..like
> any sport ..I think part of the fun is the afterwards b*tch sessions, not
> sure we want to lose that ..plus it's one less thing to talk about during
> .....late night beer drinking sessions at the Crowne Plaza.
> 73
> Steve KL7SB
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> Eric Gruff
> Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 1:27 PM
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] High Rate Dual Radio CQing
> Just to add my $0.02 to all these discussions on categories and
> assisted/unassisted.
> I think for single operator, at least, there should only be categories based
> on power. If I'm running SOHP one radio unassisted, I have a much better
> chance (based on my experience) in beating an assisted op (also one radio)
> in the same power category than I do against SO2R at HP. Yet, if the SO2R op
> isn't using assistance, he's lumped in with me as unassisted. I have run
> both assisted vs unassisted (one radio) in many contests, and I'm not
> convinced that packet spots and the like make a huge difference other than
> to complete sweeps and find rare multipliers. From what I can tell, SO2R is
> a huge advantage, so why would I have to compete against that category as
> "unassisted"?
> Let's just assume that SO2R, packet use (or not), dual watch receivers, etc.
> are all just tools that good ops can use to their advantage. Power
> categories are a way to balance things out, but you can argue that we should
> also have categories for antennas. At any power level, does an op using a
> single multiband dipole or vertical stand any chance against another station
> with multiple 100' towers and huge monoband yagis, etc.? Talk about an
> unfair competition! I'm not complaining here - I just think most of what
> we're arguing over is completely random in the big picture.
> 73 and see you this weekend (using HP, one radio and a very long inverted
> vee antenna, probably with "assistance" from the spotting network).
> Eric NC6K
> _______________________________________________
> 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

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list