[CQ-Contest] The Rise and Fall of Contesting

[Radio K0HB]

Well reasoned and well stated, Doug.

Regarding your last point ("It's no longer an operator contest, but has 
become a technology contest."), I will take some exception, and use your 
opening statement to frame my comments.

"Many years ago contesting was a competition of an operator and station 
against the world."

Stated a little differently, you could say "A competitor was the fellow 
acquired good skills and built a good station."

That description says that a contest is a blend of "operator" and 
"technology".   I think that blend is a "good thing" --- after all, we are 
charged by our regulators to "advance the state of the radio art", and I 
think that contesting, more than any other subset of the amateur radio 
hobby, has contributed to that advancement.

With that in mind, here is a PBI ("Partially Baked Idea") for 
consideration/development by the gathered brains here.  Be gentle.  I am 
almost making this up as I type, so there will likely be gaping holes in the 
PBI.

I am going to suggest a different approach to "Single Operator" categories. 
Rather that two categories (Assisted and Not Assisted) I suggest three 
categories.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1) Single Op CLASSIC:  This is the bare bones "boy and his radio".  All the 
information he uses in the contest is gathered by his own ears in real time 
during the contest.  He uses no aids such as clusters, RBN's, skimmers 
(local or remote), SCP, pre-fills, lists, tables, or other paraphernalia to 
acquire callsign/frequency information,  or to sanitize/groom/verify what he 
copies "off the air".

His logging software should function only to record what he copies/sends, 
perform other logging housekeeping (band/frequency recording, serial number 
incrementing), and voice or CW keying.  It might also include a 
manually-filled bandmap facility.  This class is NOT restricted to any 
length of operating time.

The defining characteristic of this class would be that ALL information in 
the log is GATHERED AND DEVELOPED BY THE OPERATOR from the passband of his 
receiver(s) during the contest time frame.  Built-in band scopes which 
simply show "activity" without station identification are almost ubiquitous, 
and would be allowed.

This class would tend to favor the OPERATOR with high skill level and , but 
good TECHNOLOGY (station design, antenna building, etc.) is still a 
component.

2) Single Op LOCAL:  This class would allow locally developed/operating aids 
such as SCP, prefills, and even a LOCAL skimmer type technology.  The SCP 
and pre-fill information would come from THAT STATION's own logs, not from 
outside sources.  Basically an "anything goes" Single Op using only 
information OBTAINED AND DEVELOPED INSIDE THAT STATION either in real time 
or from previous contests.  No OUTSIDE callsign/frequency information or 
records could be used.

The defining characteristic of the class would be that any LOCAL 
(on-premise) technology would be permitted.

This class would favor those with high OPERATOR skill, and at the same time 
encourage "out of the envelope" thinking about the information-gathering 
TECHNOLOGY.

3) Single Op CONNECTED:  This class would allow any and all local and 
OUTSIDE aids, equivalent to the current "Assisted" and "Unlimited" classes.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


73, de Hans, K0HB
--
"Just a boy and his radio"™
--
Proud Member of:
. ARRL - http://www.arrl.org
. RSGB - http://www.rsgb.org
. A1 Operators - http://www.arrl.org/a-1-op
. Minnesota Wireless contesters - http://www.W0AA.org
. Arizona Outlaws contesters - http://www.arizonaoutlaws.net
. Twin City DX Assn - http://www.tcdxa.org
. Minnesota Amateur Radio Technical Society - http://www.mn-arts.org/
. Lake Vermilion DX Assn - http://www.lvdxa.org
. Royal Naval Amateur Radio Society - http://www.rnars.org.uk/
. SOC - http://www.qsl.net/soc
. CW Operators Club – http://www.cwops.org
. SKCC - http://www.skccgroup.com/
--

-----Original Message----- 
From: Doug Renwick
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2015 3:12 PM
To: cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: [CQ-Contest] The Rise and Fall of Contesting

Many years ago contesting was a competition of an operator and station
against the world.  It was all hand logging and using the smarts between
one's ears.  I achieved some pretty good results both at home and on
dxpeditions (8P6B, J7D, ZF1MM, /VP2V, etc.  Essentially I proved to myself
that I could compete with the best.  And contesting was a good way to
increase my country/band count.  There were less ways of cheating.

Technology has in a way ruined contesting.  Today there are many more
different ways to enhance a score using the available technology.
Technology has become a crutch.

Consider the time wasted in trying to adjust the rules to cover all the
different categories and all the different technologies.  Contesting is
bogged down with rules and regulations.

Today if I decide to operate in a contest fully or just part time, I usually
don't submit a log.  Sometimes I am asked to submit a check log.  I don't
have to prove anything to myself.  Why should I submit a log with all the
rules mumbo jumbo and all the many more ways to cheat.  I operate just for
the fun of operating.  And yes I use some of the new technologies like
computer logging.

It's no longer an operator contest, but has become a technology contest.

Doug

Generation of idiots - smart phones and dumb people.



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest