[CQ-Contest] Past Prediction of the Future of Contesting.

[Bill Coleman]

Kevan,

Now I understand what you are saying.

But, you missed my first point about tuning up the band — finding stations that have not been spotted yet. Those are even easier to work than those are are spotted.

The point of the moderately full band map is that even if you are tuning, it’s not going to take any appreciable time before you find something — whether it is a spotted station or one that hasn’t been spotted yet. That’s why I found it superior than just selecting from spot to spot.

When the band has less activity (eg fewer spots), there may be lest benefit with this technique. For mult ops at a M/M, though, we have to slog through no matter what the band conditions. Once I figured this out, I spent a lot more time tuning, and felt I was a lot more successful as a mult op.

I didn’t even mention the use of a pan adapter, which can greatly speed the tuning process. Having just gotten a P3, I’m still trying to figure out those nuances. But knowing where the band is empty can help make the decision whether to tune from spot to spot or to select spots.

I think the bottom line comes down to operator skill, whether assisted or unassisted. 

> On Aug 25, 2021, at 10:18 PM, Kevan Nason <knason00 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Bill, AA4LR,
> 
> Well... Here is what I was responding to. You wrote:
> "If the band map is moderately full, you are better off tuning up the band
> and picking off spots as you go. " and "Second, when you do tune to a spot,
> it’s hit or miss on how fresh it might be. Fresher spots tend to be more
> competitive and it takes more time to get through, which hurts the rate. If
> you are clicking on recent spots, you will waste time."
> 
> (A bit long)
> 
> For the last several years I've held the belief that in most cases an
> experienced contester can tell within two or three seconds after tuning in
> a QSO if the runner is experienced or not. If the op is a good runner then
> an experienced S&P op has a better chance of quickly breaking through the
> pileup. That's true whether you are at a superstation like NQ4I was or at a
> little low power station like mine. I forget who it was, but a contester
> with a prefix of K2 put out a "rule of twos". Think I first saw that in a
> presentation by Gary, W9XT. If you can't bust a pileup in two tries (modify
> for your station) then move on and come back later.
> 
> If the band map is moderately full then by definition there are a lot of
> spots available. Combining those two things above means you can jump from
> spot to spot, working or skipping as applicable, at a high rate of speed.
> If you jump you spend less time tuning and more time actually in the
> pileup. An op skilled at busting pileups can use the time saved by jumping
> to make more q's. -- even if some of the stations they jumped to are new
> and have small pileups. Ops who tune the VFO instead of jumping are going
> to run across stations who just started CQ too. Many times while turning
> the VFO I've seen a new signal that isn't yet associated with a spotted
> call sign pop up on the Spectrum Display. Just as you say Bill, if I dally
> and work a station or two before going to the new signal then a small
> pileup is often there when I finally get around to tuning them in. Didn't
> matter that I didn't jump to the signal. I still had to put up with the
> pileup even though I was tuning the VFO.
> 
> I didn't use spots for years. I turned the VFO. I still use the dial and
> Spectrum Scope in contests like the NAQP's so haven't lost the ability to
> quickly tune in stations. (Yes, I sometimes jump to stations using the N1MM
> Spectrum Window too). With a bit of practice, and by maintaining the
> discipline to leave a pileup that you can't quickly break through, it is
> more productive to jump to spotted stations than it is tune to them. If you
> still maintain it's a waste of time because of new spot pileups, then tell
> your M&Q window in N1MM to put the oldest spots on top and move down the
> list that way. (One of my primary driving principles is if what you are
> doing now isn't giving you a good rate then try something else.)
> 
> BUT -- I maintain that to win, besides jumping or tuning to spots the
> Assisted operator must both run and tune the VFO to find unspotted
> stations.
> 
> I think it was Jeff, KU8E, who mentioned something I have also found to be
> true. The runner who combines jumping from spot to spot on the 2nd radio
> has a big advantage. That person combines mults coming to her that never
> call CQ with being able to find mults who mostly run so won't be picked up
> on her running radio. Other than 2BSIQ, I think you'll find more and more
> people that win are jumping with their second radio. Despite claims of a
> few years ago that Assisted ops can't compete with Unassisted, you are
> seeing more and more top ops enter the Assisted category. As they do,
> Assisted scores are beginning to be higher than unassisted. That's likely
> due to how they are using the second rig to pick up those mults. Having the
> ability to jump from spot to spot on the 2nd rig rather than mentally
> process tuning the VFO, and then being able to use recorded
> audio/CW/Digital macro F-key file transmission, frees their attention so
> they can maintain a decent run rate at the same time they are putting new
> mults and q's in the log on radio 2.
> 
> I'm not very good at that 2nd radio stuff yet, but even I am seeing the
> benefits of the 2nd rig being used in that way.
> 
> Kevan N4XL
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL        Mail: aa4lr at arrl.net
Web: http://boringhamradiopart.blogspot.com
Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!"
           -- Wilbur Wright, 1901