[CQ-Contest] mea culpa

[Mats Strandberg]

Martin,

This is not an issue of being passionate or not. We all are in this group.

It is also not an issue of being unfriendly on technology development and
evolution.

Interleaved CQ has NOTHING to do with technology development. The technical
needs are the same as for SO2R or similar multi station disciplines.

This discussion is about decent behavior and economy of narrow band
spectrums - especially on SSB.

I welcome you to participate in a World-Wide contest from the most
contest-populated area in the workd -  Europe.

During the past weekend, 10 meter was useless. 15 meters basically the
same. All stations were gathered on 20 and 40 meters both day and night. I
can assure you that interleaved CQ usage by even 5 big gun stations would
have created pure disaster on those to bands with less than 400 kHz
theoretical available space.... With 2.4 kHz SSB signal, this whole
discussion should not even take place my friend!

I am extremely passionate about contesting, but I think I am also equipped
with a fair share of common sense and logical ability to analyze reality
and physical limitations.

Interleaved CQ in full scale is the end to contesting apart from 75-100
superstations!

Please take a step back you guys who lack experience from operating contest
in highly contest-populated areas - and try to absorb messages of reality
instead of stubbornly and with emotions push for your opinions, without
realizing facts of reality.

73 de Mats RM2D (SM6LRR)




On Wed, 29 Mar 2017 at 06:13, Ria Jairam <rjairam at gmail.com> wrote:

> First of all, I also don't fault the PJ4G team at all. They interpreted the
> rules as written (or not written, in this case), and it paid off, which is
> fine.
>
> However, I do believe, like you do that in band dual CQing needs to be
> addressed. It is a bandwidth usage issue. That's all I see it as. I do
> believe the right approach will be to prohibit it for future contests.
>
> The contest committee will of course make the final decision. All we can do
> is provide input.
>
> Ria
> N2RJ
>
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 7:38 AM, Martin Pelt <n4uu73 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >  I want to apologize to the list for any comments that I may have
> offended.
> >
> > I am extremely passionate for our sport. The technological advances and
> > operator skill advances keep this sport exciting.
> >
> > I thought the attacks on PJ4G were unfair. Some may see them as
> exploiting
> > a loophole and others might see them as top competitors that read the
> rules
> > and  decided to push the envelope to win. If you follow the rules and do
> > everything to win is that being unsporting ?
> >
> > The technological advances will always bring problems but they also
> create
> > opportunities. I applaud the people that put the time and energy to build
> > world class stations and then put the time and effort into advancing
> their
> > skills. I also the applaud the people that put time, money and energy
> into
> > building resources like the RBN.
> >
> > Our sport has to have room for the boy and his radio crowd and the people
> > that are going to use every legal tool available to be highly
> competitive.
> >
> > I do agree that the ARRL needs to address dual CQing in the same band on
> > phone.
> >
> > I my opinion cheating is the one thing that we all agree is our biggest
> > problem. While I think it is a small percentage we all know that it
> exist.
> > Tools like the RBN and the capability for contest committees to record
> the
> > whole contest will go along way to solving the problem. But these tools
> are
> > not cheap and at this time the man power to use them effectively is a
> > finite resource at this time.  While I'm at it I would also encourage
> that
> > any station that want to finish in the top few places be required to use
> > real time scoreboards. Boy would that not make more exciting and push
> even
> > harder if you knew how your competition was doing.
> >
> > I also think that next big step would be real time log checking. We are
> all
> > hooked to the internet why not ?
> >
> > Of course my suggestions require more hardware and manpower and all of
> this
> > cost money. I will have supported the WRTC and will be sending a check to
> > the WWROF. I encourage all of you that have the resources and passion for
> > the sport to do likewise.
> >
> > At this point I will crawl back into my hole. Hopefully I will have the
> > common sense to remain there.
> >
> > 73, Martin N4UU
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>