[CQ-Contest] CQ WW Committee blog post - audio recording

[Dave Edmonds]

Great comments... How about this scenario.....

I start working the contest without a recording knowing that I would not be
able to give it a 'competitive' effort due to the fact that my wife and I
are attending a wedding on Saturday. We'll on Saturday morning I receive a
call from the wedding party that the groom ran away with the maid of honor
and the wedding was canceled..Now I'm not going to the wedding and I can
devote my weekend to the contest.... Oooopppps... I can't be competitive
because I could win a top 3 spot in the USA and if I win I could be DQ'ed.

What do I do?

A. Don't work the contest competitively (that's no fun).
B. Work the contest competitively and submit a check log (that's no reward).
C. Work the contest competitively, submit a log and bet on the contest
committee not requesting a recording.
D. Blow off the contest and find another wedding to attend.

Thoughts?
 Dave at wn4afp.com

On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 9:10 PM, Mark <markzl3ab at gmail.com> wrote:

> The CQ WW Committee blog post about audio recording is a bit of surprise to
> me.  Up until now I had figured audio recording would only be an issue in
> Oceania for the serious entrants (i.e. entries with lots of QSOs and/or
> hours on the air).  In Oceania a casual entry of 1-200 Qs could easily put
> you in the top three of just about any single op single band category,
> assuming the category even had three entrants (I won the Oceania CW 40m QRP
> assisted category and set a new record with one QSO and two points a few
> years back).  In its post the committee quotes the Asian 160m low power
> category.  Looking at the 2016 SSB results there were no entrants in that
> category (assuming there wasn't an entrant(s) who was moved to a checklog
> for not audio recording) so any entry at all would have won it.  In Oceania
> there was one entrant who made four QSOs.
>
> I would pick most if not all ops who perceive themselves as casual would
> not audio record their entry (or even know they had to).  Is it really the
> Committee's intention to DQ casual entrants who end up in the top three due
> to a lack of other entrants, if they do not provide an audio record?  If so
> then I'd suggest the rules should be amended to make it clear that any
> entry competitive or not which ends up in the top three is subject to the
> audio recording requirement because casual ops will not consider themselves
> competitive.  It will of course have the effect of decimating casual single
> category entries in this part of world (such as it is) by ops who just
> enter for fun but who do not want to run the risk of being besmirched by a
> DQ.
> A better way (and it seems to me contesting is heading this way in general)
> would be for entrants to be able to enter any category they like but
> designate themselves as casual or competitive.  If casual then they would
> not need to provide an audio record but could still be listed in the
> results database for their category (assuming they comply with the other
> rules).  However they would not eligible for a certificate which would go
> to the highest competitive entries and who of course would need to provide
> an audio record on request.  Also only competitive entries would be
> eligible to set records and to be listed in the top entrant lists in the
> results write up.  At least this way an entrant can make a conscious
> decision as to how they want their entry to be treated rather than run the
> risk of a DQ if they are unlucky enough to enter a category with less than
> three other entrants.
>
> 73
> Mark ZL3AB
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>



-- 
Dave Edmonds
PK Ministry Webs
864.288.6678
dave at pkministrywebs.com
www.pkministrywebs.com