[CQ-Contest] "It's just to save on typing"

[jamesdavidcain at gmail.com]

Nice job, Hans.

 

I try to be “unstable” too! I have operated from seven different states
since 2002. And I’m thinking about moving, again.

 

At least in SS the serial number, Precedence, CK, and ARRL/RAC section are
ALL unknowns. Copy or die.

 

A couple of years ago I suggested doing away with 599 and 59 in all contest
exchanges and got booed “because the signal report is a placeholder.”

 

My original post about this was limited to the CK. Some people just don’t
get the charm of sending the year you were first licensed (the rule means
your first amateur radio license, not your first U.S. amateur radio license,
not your driver’s license, not your poetic license). 

 

The All Asia DX Contest has this kind of charm, too, with one’s age as the
exchange. 

 

For those who think SS is too slow on Sunday afternoon, I have a contest
proposal:

 

A contest for the weak (inaudible)-signal digital crowd, FT8 or JT Whatever,
that requires a real exchange! A “contact” could take hours. 

 

K1TN

 

---

 

Since I am one of those whose SweepStakes exchange may be unstable from year
to 

year, I’ll offer my explanation why.  

 

You may agree, or you may not agree with my rationale.  No problem to me
either 

way.  It is what it is.

 

So here goes.

 

It is my conviction that RadioSport contests should measure some skill, and 

should reward those radiomen most accomplished in whatever skill is being 

measured.

 

Different contests are arranged, deliberately or not, to measure different 

skills and talents.

 

CQWW, as one example, measures a complex skill set which requires a good 

radioman to balance high run rates against an effective harvest of
multipliers, 

a fine sense of propagation awareness, and knowing when to defer high run
rate 

on one band in order to harvest fleeting multipliers on a slower band.  The 

exchange of information in this contest is quite predictable, and not 

challenging to copy.  If you correctly copy the call sign “K0HB” then your 

logging program will fill in “59 4”.    In summary, CQWW measures run rate
and 

aggregate multiplier harvest, with less emphasis on copying the content of
the 

exchange.

 

SweepStakes has a different emphasis.  Run rate is still of some importance,


especially early in the contest, but not nearly to the extent as in CQWW.
The 

number of multipliers in SS is miniscule compared to CQWW, only 83 vs
possible 

thousands in CQWW.  In fact, “chasing mults” in SS is a really poor use of 

time, since nearly every one except a small handful will fall into your log
in 

the normal course of operating for 24 hours.  So high run rate and effective


multiplier harvest are NOT skills particularly measured by SS.  

 

The challenge in SS is the ability to copy a complex exchange.  SS has its 

roots in traffic handling (the 5-element exchange mimics the ARRL message 

header format).  

 

In traffic handling, none of those 5 elements are predictable 

message-to-message, let alone year-to-year.  They are not “unchanging facts”

 

If SS is built to measure  the ability to copy a complex and unpredictable 

header, then making the exchange “predictable” devalues the very skill set
we 

set out reward.  The more uncertainty we can introduce into the content of
the 

exchange, the better the contest will measure and reward those radiomen most


skilled in copying complex information accurately.

 

My purpose isn’t to confuse you; it is to challenge you to develop the
skills 

required to score high in SweepStakes.

 

On the other hand, you may have different fingers.

 

73, de Hans, KØHB

"Just a boy and his radio"™