[CQ-Contest] Assisted vs Unassisted

[Zack Widup]

I would guess that most of the little pistols don't cheat. If so, I'd
like to know why. I have no thoughts of winning anything from my home
station. I do it for fun.

In the ARRL DX CW contest this year I only used packet to find the
frequencies of the Z81 station because it was an all-time new DXCC
country for me. The rest were all S&P QSO's. I still entered as
"Assisted." And in the recent VHF Sprints, the rules specify QRP as
less than 5 watts. More than that puts you in the Low Power class. My
portable stations are set up for the ARRL rules for VHF contests,
which specify 10 watts as the limit for a QRP entry. So even though I
was running 8 or 9 watts on most VHF+ bands, I entered as Low Power.

And I still had fun!

73, Zack W9SZ


On 5/9/15, W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu at w0mu.com> wrote:
> There is virtually no way to know who is getting spots and from where.
> There will never be a system requiring and login and password and even
> if there was, there would be a 100 different ways to get around it.
>
> You can be smart about working spots if you are cheating.
>
> Why don't we just open the barn door completely and have a Single OP
> category.
>
> There appears to be way too many ways to game the game as it is.
>
> Is there much integrity left in contesting?
>
> Mike W0MU
>
> On 5/8/2015 9:28 PM, Jeff Clarke wrote:
>> Since people aren't playing by the rules maybe CQ should get tough and
>> consider changing the single operator unassisted transmitter class to
>> something similar to rule 3.4.4 that is used for ARRL DX :
>>
>> http://www.arrl.org/arrl-dx
>>
>> I know this would be very unpopular to those who like to do SO2R. Note I'm
>> not anti-SO2R because I do it myself.  Maybe even consider changing
>> assisted to only work multipliers on the 2nd radio, similar to the current
>> multi-single rules for CQWW. That would allow some type of SO2R for those
>> who like operating a contest that way.
>>
>> On a positive side it would probably eliminate any question whether
>> someone claiming single-op is really operating in that category. By
>> looking at a log for someone doing dual CQ's you really can't prove one
>> operator is doing all the operating anyway. Plus it would be easier to
>> figure out if someone is cheating by using a spotting network because a
>> lot of the multipliers would be worked when doing a band change. It would
>> be easy to compare those QSO to the archives of the spots during a
>> contest.
>>
>> It would probably make the log checkers job easier as there is probably a
>> lot of effort being expended in identifying cheaters.
>>
>> Jeff
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>