[CQ-Contest] CQWW Assisted - Is it just another Urban Myth ?

[Ed Sawyer]

I agree completely with Stan’s response.

 

Ed  N1UR

 

From: Stan Stockton [mailto:wa5rtg at gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 1, 2017 9:50 AM
To: Trent Sampson
Cc: sawyered at earthlink.net; cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Assisted - Is it just another Urban Myth ?

 

Trent,

 

Please clarify so everyone will understand your thinking.

 

Do you believe there is an advantage in having a list of everyone on the band and identification as to whether each callsign is a new multiplier or a new contact?  I think the answer is yes.

 

Do you believe that in general the top operators in the assisted category could do as well or better if they did not have the assistance?  I think the answer is no.

 

Do you believe that in general the top operators in the unassisted category would widen the margin of victory if the two categories were combined?  I think the answer is yes.

 

What possible relevance do the scores between the two cateogries have to do with whether they should be combined?

 

Why would you propose combining categories when overwhelmingly those who operate unassisted want to continue operating unassisted?  That is why they choose that category.  They have a choice and choose the one they prefer. Even you choose the unassisted category.    

 

The fact is that if you asked someone who won the CQ WW Contest in any given year the respondent will go to the SOAB results to give you the answer.  Most will not ask you whether you mean the assisted category or the category where someone used a tribander and wires or whether you are talking about low power on 40m with a dipole and internet assistance.  There are several who push to combine these categories every year and not yet have I seen a logical explanation as to why they want to do it.  Certainly whether the scores are higher or lower in one category has absolutely nothing to do with whether categories should be combined.  Would you feel differently if a top operator who could perhaps win the unassisted category ventured over to the assisted category and blew away the competition.  It has already been done.  

 

Everything else being equal, a single operator using the internet to identify every double multiplier that comes on the band will beat the guy who doesn't have that information every single time.  The plain and simple fact is that unassisted operators usually (not always) beat the ones using assistance because they are better operators operating from better stations.

 

73...Stan, K5GO   

 

On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 7:59 AM, Trent Sampson <vk4ts at outlook.com> wrote:

Hi Ed,

You said,

"Others are simply looking at the efficiency gain of being fed spots and the fact that their eyes add another receptor beyond their 2 ears and that adds to their efficiency as well."

Please find one example in the High Scores of the CQWW or the CQWPX that supports your hypothesis ...

By the way I prefer SOAB unassisted - if on the rare occasion I am not in a multi op

Regards


Trent Sampson
VK4TS
Po Box 275 Mooloolaba QLD 4557
Mobile 0408497550







-----Original Message-----
From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Ed Sawyer
Sent: Tuesday, 1 August 2017 9:23 PM
To: cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Assisted - Is it just another Urban Myth ?

What is the motivation for Assisted Operators to even care if there is an unassisted class?  How is it harming you in any way that other - equally as important as you - people choose to contest the way we grew up and enjoyed it?  It doesn't bother me that its "possible" for someone in the class to cheat.  It didn't bother me that it was "possible" for someone to cheat in Low Power class when I choose to compete in that class.  I know what I am doing and I know when something smells bad out there as well.



I choose to compete in unassisted because I love the balance.  Others are simply looking at the efficiency gain of being fed spots and the fact that their eyes add another receptor beyond their 2 ears and that adds to their efficiency as well.  I have no strike against those and realize, it helps.
Good for them.



Until someone can tell me how what I choose to do for my better enjoyment harms them, I respectfully ask for the ability to choose the class I better enjoy.



Thank you.



Ed  N1UR

_______________________________________________
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