[CQ-Contest] CONTESTING FUN

Jim Neiger n6tj at sbcglobal.net
Tue May 24 22:34:14 EDT 2016


Well, since I kind of started the CONVERGENCE AND CHANGE spin here, in 
response to K5ZD's "editorial" in the recent CQ magazine, I wanted to 
comment simply on Bill N3RR's  final words herein: *more FUN!*

I suppose most of us got started in contesting (mine was the 1955 Field 
Day @ W7SAA) because it appeared to be *fun*.  And then we also learned 
you could learn and acquire *skills.* And as time progressed, we further 
learned that trying harder, finding a more competitive station, maybe 
being DX, one could actually be a competitor.  And all of these 
contributed to *more FUN! *Some of us were blessed to be learning at the 
same time the world's best: KH6IJ  W4KFC  ZD8J   K0DQ(from whatever call 
Scotty was signing)  W9IOP  W6ITA (W6RR)   were competing for the top 
scores.  I trust that I'm not the only one still of this earth who 
wasted hours, just listening to the afore-mentioned? "When I grow up, I 
want to be just like them"....

Some comment that today, without packet and RBN, enticing those less 
serious to operate and call the top scoring stations, scores would be 
diminished, and none of us would have *FUN! *Sure, some phenomenal 
scores have been racked-up these years, like SOAB QSO totals > 10,000.  
I seem to remember listening to K0DQ in 1970 (XE1IIJ??), making > 10,000 
QSOs from Mexico.  Did Scott, without spotting assistance,  have less 
fun than today's 10 kilo QSO operators who benefit from many "assisted" 
callers??  I seriously doubt it.

in 1969, I set the SOAB world record in the ARRL DX CW test from ZD8Z.  
That was also when it was two 48 hours weekends.  I remember it like it 
was yesterday, no packet, no RBN, and  I operated 88 of the 96 hours, 
made 5704 QSO's, no computer, no memory keyer, just my Collins S-Line 
and my Hallicrafters HA-1 keyer.  The logging was with lead pencil, with 
erasers, on legal-size tablets.  Wow, 5704 QSO's in 88 hours.  Let's 
see, that's an average of 64 per hour.  For the CT1BOH, W2GD, W2SC, N6MJ 
operators of today, 64 per is when the band is dead.  Or maybe they did 
a 64/hour on their second radio while running 200+ per on the prime 
radio.  Did I have *fun* in 1969?  You bet.  Do I have *fun* today when 
I'm trying to sort out the 100 zero beat on my run frequency because of 
RBN?  Maybe, but it is certainly less fun.  Your mileage may vary.

Sometimes, I fear we've lost this penultimate goal of just having *fun! 
*We are taking it all too seriously, perhaps.  Some even resort to 
cheating, they've become so desperate to demonstrate to us all, that 
they are competitors.  Sometimes I think we should all just send in 
check logs, enjoy the *fun *of operating, maybe try and best our score 
from last year......

Two final comments:

(1) so doing away with unassisted maybe helps eliminate the "assisted"  
cheaters, but then how do we eliminate those cheating with power?  I 
remember when I went to Slovenia for WRTC, and one of the active 
contesters from (I'll not identify the country to protect the innocent), 
but let me just say it is Zone 15, came up to me and boasted, "you know, 
Jim, everyone in my country are running Henry 8K's"

(2) and someone nailed it:  K5ZD's quest to combine unassisted and 
assisted it simply the *ELIMINATION *of unassisted! And why should 
anyone choosing to operate assisted care about we who choose not??

*NOT FUN!*

Vy 73

Jim Neiger  N6TJ

**


On 5/23/2016 7:27 PM, Bill Hider wrote:
> I totally agree with Mark, KD4D and I am a SOA operator and I want to keep
> the SO & SOA categories separate.
> Why would anyone care to combine them after the nearly 30 years we've
> managed to keep them separate?
> I say "we" because I was in the vanguard in the 1980s participating as a M/S
> just because I was using packet as a single op
> and there was no such thing as "assisted" or "unlimited".  I took spots in
> off the packet and printed them using my ASR TTY machine.
> Later on, back then, I was able to make a 1,000,000 point score in ARRL DX
> by clicking on the spots - great FUN!
>
> For me it's two things:
> It's more FUN for me to operate SOA than SO.
> Having two categories means more awards which equals more participation
> which equals more FUN!
>
> Simple.
>
> Bill N3RR
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> kd4d at comcast.net
> Sent: Monday, May 23, 2016 11:11 AM
> To: cq-contest
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Convergence and Change
>
> Good day, Martin:
>
> It makes sense to keep the separation between single operator and single
> operator Assisted/Unlimited because many of us believe the skill involved in
> finding stations to work without having a computer or other operator do it
> for us is worth measuring (and a lot of fun).  The organizers of WRTC, for
> one, agree - look at their rules sometime.
>
> It is not obvious that operators who don't use the DX alerting assistance
> (particularly on CW) will do better than those who do not - THAT is what the
> SOs are complaining about.  We don't want to be forced to use DX alerting
> assistance to compete.  The same operators, using DX alerting assistance,
> will make higher scores than they do without...The CW skimmers/RBN have made
> this particularly obvious for CW operations.
>
> Clearly, combining the categories is all about comparing the highest scores
> for everyone and everyone wishing to be competitive will use DX alerting
> assistance if the categories are combined.  I certainly use it in WAE (where
> there is one category) when I operate that contest.
>
> Why do the advocates of combining the categories - surely they only operate
> Assisted - want to combine the categories anyway?  I understand the concerns
> of the contest organizers, but why do any of the Assisted operators care?
>
> 73,
>
> Mark, KD4D
>
> At this point it makes no sense to keep this separation anymore.
>
> In the end, SO will keep doing better than those who use DX alerting
> assistance, so what SOs are complaining about?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "LU5DX Martin" <lu5dx at lucg.com.ar>
> To: "Davor Kucelin" <davor.kucelin at plavalaguna.hr>, "cq-contest"
> <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 11:08:25 PM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Convergence and Change
>
> What's your point?
>
> Combining SOAB and SOAB(A) has nothing to do with comparing the highest
> scores in each category.
>
> It's about eliminating  the possibility of taking even a very small unfair
> advantage throughout the 48-hour period that can place a cheater above
> his/her competitors (even if it is very little above in the rankings)
>
> It also has to do with eliminating the burden and work overload that implies
> trying to find those who cheat.
>
> Reality is that ops who cheat have perfected their techniques beyond what
> can be detected by log checkers. Those who get caught year after year are
> those who abuse of DX clusters in a very obvious way.
>
> At this point it makes no sense to keep this separation anymore.
>
> In the end, SO will keep doing better than those who use DX alerting
> assistance, so what SOs are complaining about?
>
> They can even still use a pen and paper logs and send CW with a straight key
> if they want.
>
> Are there still contesters out there entering contests because they think
> they are winning anything at all, or winning over anybody at all??
>
> What in the world would make someone think he/she is winning over someone
> who is thousand of miles away, with totally different equipment, propagation
> and participating according to a bunch of rules that are hardly
> enforceable?t
>
> C'mon guys. It seems like intelligence is inversely proportional to egos
> among certain high profile contesters :-)
>
> Our "competitions" have nothing of real competitions. It is just a game of
> enjoyment, but if we are still going to pretend these are competitions, at
> least we can establish the foundations to make them something a bit more
> trustworthy in those terms.
>
> 73,
>
> Martin LU5DX
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 4:03 AM, Davor Kucelin <davor.kucelin at plavalaguna.hr
>> wrote:
>> CQWW SSB Top 10 scores all years
>>
>>
>>
>> SOABHP
>>
>>
>>
>> 1             EA8BH  1999      SO HP ALL           25,646,796
>> 10,253   176         692         -              N5TJ
>>
>> 2             CN2R     2004      SO HP ALL           20,938,680
>> 8,655     172         668         -              W7EJ
>>
>> 3             D4B        2004      SO HP ALL           20,433,438
>> 8,799     172         674         -              4L5A
>>
>> 4             D4B        2003      SO HP ALL           20,119,968
>> 8,956     169         634         -              4L5A
>>
>> 5             CN2R     2003      SO HP ALL           18,743,250
>> 8,682     152         594         -              W7EJ
>>
>> 6             HC8A     1999      SO HP ALL           18,607,050
>> 8,638     175         595         -              N6KT
>>
>> 7             CN2R     2011      SO HP ALL           18,518,160
>> 8,409     167         593         44.7       W7EJ
>>
>> 8             CN2R     2013      SO HP ALL           18,277,746
>> 8,370     167         579         46.9       W7EJ     [Cert]
>>
>> 9             HC8A     2000      SO HP ALL           18,122,040
>> 9,160     163         547         -              N6KT
>>
>> 10           8P5A     2013      SO HP ALL           17,059,840
>> 10,126   162         518         48.0       W2SC
>>
>>
>>
>> SOAB ASSISTED HP
>>
>>
>>
>> 1             9Y4ZC    2003      SA HP ALL           14,979,055
>> 8,114     137         500         -              DL6FBL
>>
>> 2             P40A     2011      SA HP ALL           14,332,656
>> 7,478     156         513         43.5       KK9A
>>
>> 3             TM6M  2015      SA HP ALL           14,263,470
>> 7,057     168         667         47.9       F8DBF   [Cert]
>>
>> 4             P40P      2002      SA HP ALL           12,975,732
>> 6,639     154         528         -              W5AJ
>>
>> 5             EF8U     2013      SA HP ALL           12,743,163
>> 6,656     154         533         45.0       EA8RM [Cert]
>>
>> 6             NN3W  2011      SA HP ALL           11,828,236
>> 4,921     185         683         44.7       @N3HBX
>>
>> 7             OH0X    2015      SA HP ALL           11,790,240
>> 6,294     174         706         48.0       OH6KZP               [Cert]
>>
>> 8             P40W    2003      SA HP ALL           11,755,443
>> 6,730     137         496         -              W2GD
>>
>> 9             D4B        2002      SA HP ALL           11,567,412
>> 5,845     152         586         -              4L5A
>>
>>
>>
>> CQWW CW Top 10 scores all years
>>
>>
>>
>> SOABHP
>>
>>
>>
>> 1             EA8BH  2000      SO HP ALL           18,010,765
>> 7,555     183         634         -              N5TJ
>>
>> 2             ZF2MJ   2015      SO HP ALL           16,730,788
>> 10,014   170         527         48.0       N6MJ    [Cert]
>>
>> 3             CR3OO 2015      SO HP ALL           16,090,078
>> 8,812     152         474         48.0       CT1BOH               [Cert]
>>
>> 4             P40E      2003      SO HP ALL           15,943,070
>> 7,828     169         546         -              CT1BOH
>>
>> 5             EF8M    2011      SO HP ALL           15,846,012
>> 7,873     160         531         48.0       RD3A
>>
>> 6             PZ5T      2011      SO HP ALL           15,673,940
>> 7,592     173         545         47.4       VE3DZ
>>
>> 7             CR3E      2012      SO HP ALL           15,221,316
>> 7,275     170         556         48.0       CT1BOH               [Cert]
>>
>> 8             CR3E      2011      SO HP ALL           15,151,668
>> 7,212     168         564         48.0       CT1BOH
>>
>> 9             EF8M    2010      SO HP ALL           15,117,795
>> 7,598     158         535         47.8       RD3A
>>
>> 10           HC8N    1999      SO HP ALL           14,626,579
>> 7,001     185         546         -              N5KO
>>
>>
>>
>> SOAB ASSISTED HP
>>
>>
>>
>> 1             9Y4ZC    2004      SA HP ALL           14,581,665
>> 6,576     169         596         -              DL6FBL
>>
>> 2             5B/AA1TN          2004      SA HP ALL           13,715,573
>> 6,381     170         627         -              RW3QC
>>
>> 3             EF9O     2013      SA HP ALL           13,530,554
>> 5,826     171         623         46.6       EA5BM [Cert]
>>
>> 4             K5ZD/1 2014      SA HP ALL           12,768,365
>> 4,993     190         697         44.3                      [Cert]
>>
>> 5             EF8U     2013      SA HP ALL           11,955,126
>> 5,700     169         602         44.2       EA8RM [Cert]
>>
>> 6             CN3A    2010      SA HP ALL           11,818,159
>> 5,729     156         577         46.4
>>
>> 7             NP4Z     2013      SA HP ALL           11,341,512
>> 6,059     165         591         46.9
>>
>> 8             K5ZD/1 2015      SA HP ALL           11,275,488
>> 4,742     179         654         44.9                      [Cert]
>>
>> 9             CT9M    2002      SA HP ALL           11,225,452
>> 5,181     159         605         -              DL2CC
>>
>> 10           P40C      2014      SA HP ALL           11,085,536
>> 6,242     154         462         44.8       KU1CW
>>
>>
>>
>> So what are we talking about?
>>
>> Best Assisted score is way below 10th unassisted score.
>>
>> What are you than scared about to combine the 2 categorys.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 73 Dave 9A1UN
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2016.0.7598 / Virus Database: 4568/12285 - Release Date: 05/23/16
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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