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

Tue Aug 1 11:53:39 EDT 2017

Trent,

There is no myth.  Anyone who thinks there is no advantage in having a list
of everyone who is calling CQ on CW and being able to sort the list
according to which contacts will provide new multipliere and new QSOs is
mistaken.  You will be unable to tind a single person who operates
competitively who will agree with you.  Certainly the data doesn't support
your view because the operators are not the same caliber.  If you believe
that to be true you are incorrect.  You cannot compare the scores between
the winners of these two categories because the best operators, except on
rare occasion, don't choose to use the internet. See if you can find a
single person who has ever won in either category who does not believe
using the RBN is an advantage.

Regarding my dog in the fight, I am having fun in my retirement years and
have a new QTH on Cayman Brac where I plan to spend several months a year.
Who knows, I may someday enter the assisted category before I move to
assisted living :-).  Although I don't need to have a dog in the fight in
order to want contesting to remain an enjoyable passtime for all who enjoy
it, I do have a son, N5DX, who has won several contests and since he is in
his 30's I think it would be good to preserve the fun of contesting for him.

One of the biggest fears I have is that someone will create software that
will read callsigns (already done) and combine it with the RBN data (easy
to do) and create an Automated CW Contesting station that with multiple
rigs, sequencing and on-going refinement could eventually run circles
around the very best operators.  If that happens it won't be much fun for
anyone except those who will win, not because of a combination of factors
including operator ability, but only because they have the best station.

>My basis for the questions is I am looking at doing SOAB during the low
sunspot years and I am wondering what all the fuss is about

There was no fuss until you made your post.  Enter whatever category you
want.  No one cares what category you choose except you.

73...Stan, K5GO

On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 9:16 AM, Trent Sampson <vk4ts at outlook.com> wrote:

> Hi Stan
>
>
>
> It is a quagmire
>
>
>
> We have assumed that SOAB A is an advantage – but with even top operators
> like D4B, N5TJ and W2GD, never in the 25 years of CQWW and CQWPX has the
> SOAB A category exceeded the score of the SOAB Winner.
>
> It appears to be simply an urban myth that has perpetuated.
>
>
>
> Let’s answer all of your hypothesis
>
>
>
>
>
> 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?  *NO that data shows the myth is wrong*
>
>
>
> 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?  *NO that
> data shows the myth is wrong*
>
>
>
> 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?  *NO that data shows the myth is wrong *
>
>
>
> What possible relevance do the scores between the two cateogries have to
> do with whether they should be combined? *None*
>
>
>
> 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.    *Agreed however that data
> shows the myth is wrong*
>
>
>
> Looking at your scores in the CQWW do you really have a dog in this fight
> ?
>
>
>
> My basis for the questions is I am looking at doing SOAB during the low
> sunspot years and I am wondering what all the fuss is about
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
>
>
> *Trent Sampson*
>
> *VK4TS *
>
> *Po Box 275 Mooloolaba QLD 4557 *
>
> *Mobile 0408497550*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Stan Stockton [mailto:wa5rtg at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, 1 August 2017 11:50 PM
> *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
>
>
>