[CQ-Contest] SO Categories

[w5ov at w5ov.com]

Bill has an interesting point here.  Are contest entrants getting their
moneys' worth from the contest adjudicators?  Since there are no entry
fees, the case could be made that entrants get a lot more back.

That all said, contrary to Bill's assertion, it IS NOT IMPOSSIBLE to
determine who is using skimmer, assistance, etc.  Just like in Bill's
running analogy, the log shows where you went, when, how fast you got
there, etc.  If the log checker sees that you've gone "5 miles in 5
minutes" they know that there's no way you ran it yourself.  You hopped in
a car, called Uber, or used some other kind of assistance.  Behavior can
be "seen" from the log.  In addition, since nearly everyone you worked
sends in a log, what you did can be "built" and analyzed from what others
have reported you did - even if you don't submit a log.

The amount of data available is growing every year, and more sophisticated
analyses can be performed to detect various types of cheating that many
still do. I've been involved in log checking for over 20 years and
detecting cheating has gotten easier because of the availability of data
and the ability to analyze huge amounts of data quickly.  The work
required to analyze that data is hard work, but having the data and faster
computers enables it to be done more quickly.   Using assistance and
self-spotting are the two biggest offenses.  Rubber clocking is also
represented in the mix, but much less common these days.

Those who cheat will and do get caught.  They are given an opportunity to
admit it & take a reclassification, or be either disqualified or have
their log treated as a Checklog (depending on circumstances).  Public
outcry is not part of that process, and those who cheat, get upset about
it, and take their case to the court of public opinion are truly wasting
their time and energy.  The cheating entrant who seeks to gain public
support for his anti-contest adjudicator position is not winning any
converts in the log adjudicator camp.  Again, those who cheat will get
caught.  The analysis processes work and are correct.

If you don't want the public ridicule and embarrassment, the remedy is
very simple:  Don't cheat.

Will you be asked for a recording?  It is highly unlikely unless... you
cheat.

Bill - thanks for your kind words about the "public grief" we get, but
most of it comes from people who don't know how the process they're
criticizing actually works.  That's OK, because no one needs to know *ALL*
of the details - especially those who cheat.

One of the things that is apparently equally misunderstood is that the
guys who actually win single op do not mess around with trying to figure
out how to hide their use of assistance or scheme either alone or with
friends to self-spot themselves.  They focus their energies entirely on
maximizing what they do alone on the air during the contest.

Look at last weekend's results from the ARRL DX SSB:

8P5A(W2SC)	9015	333	47	9,005,985	NCCC
ZF2MJ(N6MJ)	9384	306	46.5	8,607,168	SCCC
TI5W(MØDXR)	8000	329	46	7,896,000	CDXC
P49Y(AE6Y)	7962	328	42	7,834,608	MLDXCC
KP2M(N2TK)	6041	304	40	5,508,480	FRC

No assistance or self-spotting anywhere in that bunch.  Most impressive to
me are the much more "experienced" entries in 4th and 5th place.  Nice
work running with the 'kids' in the 1st 3 slots Andy and Tony!

Look at those scores - all made without cheating of any kind!

That's how it's done.

Don't cheat.

73,

Bob W5OV

On Fri, March 10, 2017 10:58 pm, Bill via CQ-Contest wrote:
> With panadapters, waterfall displays, SO2R, and bandmaps allowed in
> unassisted it is actually impossible to determine who is using Skimmer
> technology and who isn't. If you disagree with this, please explain.
>
>
> The real question is how much log checking should a contest entrant
> expect from a group of volunteer log checkers after paying a $0 entry fee?
>
>
> In running and cycling competitive events, lots of entry fee $$$ is paid
> to get an ankle strap with a timing chip. No serious competitor cuts the
> course. The split times are available on line by the time you get back to
> your car. I have spent $250 for a single mountain bike race. And I sure
> didn't finish in the top 10 or 100 or 500.
>
>
> For their their $0 entry fee should serious unassisted competitors' logs
> just get a cursory check to make sure the 80M VU2 Q is valid?
>
> So many of the posts on this topic are "it's all about me and what I
> want". The next time you submit a log and don't have to type in a VISA
> number to enter, you should be thankful. Would YOU volunteer to check logs
> and listen to recorded SO2R audio and get public grief from people that
> can't even follow the rules?
>
> 73, Bill KO7SS on Mt Lemmon in southern Arizona
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>