[CQ-Contest] Software Column in NCJ - Need Ideas

[Randy Thompson]

Launching a new contest is a difficult thing.  It's like throwing a party.  You have to hope enough people show up to make it so fun they want to do it again.

One reason the WW is so popular is that it is easy, has lots of activity, and has some great dates on the calendar. It provides a good mix of top level competition with fun for everyone. It was also one of the first.

A random exchange contest would be interesting to the hard core competitor class, but maybe not so fun for a guy who is just tuning the bands and wanting to see if he can work a new country.  It requires special software and participants who really want to see who can copy the best.

There was a 2 hour contest called the Internet Sprint about 20+ years ago where the exchange for each QSO was the name you received from the previous QSO.  Not random, but entertaining as you could hear various names get mangled or burn out.  The idea of using a random number generated by the logging software is an innovative suggestion.

Success would require running some proof of concepts first.  Both to test the logging software but also to find the balance for scoring and activity.  A 4 hour event run when there is best propagation into the areas of the world with lots of participants would be a good test bed.  That concentrates the activity.  

It is also really hard to copy random information for hours at a time so 4 hours is probably about all most could take in the beginning. As Franki pointed out, the RAEM contest has an unusual exchange that requires some thought getting the location on the first QSO.  I find the challenge interesting, but I am sure many would not.  

A short time also makes it easier to find a slot of the calendar. CWops has demonstrated that weekday contests can find activity.  

There have been groups working on real-time logging (which is another level of modernization), but it takes time and is hard. Has not shown visible progress (yet).

Maybe someone will step forward, make some rules, promote the event, and then we can see if people will respond.  Kind of like inviting people to a party...

Randy K5ZD

PS - To avoid needing software to be modified, maybe come up with a manual process for doing the randomization.  E.g., last exchange received, qso number x2, etc. That way even someone without the special software could participate.


-----Original Message-----
From: CQ-Contest <cq-contest-bounces+k5zd=outlook.com at contesting.com> On Behalf Of Paul O'Kane
Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2022 3:20 PM
To: cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Software Column in NCJ - Need Ideas

On 12/01/2022 15:55, Pete Smith N4ZR wrote:

> Do you have specific software packages, or kinds of software, that 
> you'd like to see written about in NCJ? How about subjects *about* 
> software, and the influence of software on contesting?  One topic I'm 
> thinking about is call history files

Call history files have contributed to the dumbing-down of contesting over the last 30 years or so.  It seems to me that there is little or no point in having on-air exchange elements that are known and pre-filled - CQ WW being the prime example.  And, no, I'm under no illusions - CQ WW will not change.

The issue with fixed exchange elements is just that - they are fixed for the duration of the contest. They include, apart from the ubiquitous 59(9), zones, states, counties, districts, locators, IOTA references, and so on.  If you don't copy them the first time you'll probably get or hear them later.  Even if you don't, there are plenty of online resources that have the information, including licensing databases and QRZ.com.  And, yes, I know these are all against the rules.

There is one exchange element that forces operators to copy it, and get it right, before logging the QSO - one that is impossible to deduce later without collusion with other operators concerned.  In 2017 the UK/EI Contest Club (ukeicc.com) ran a "random number" contest, as proof of concept.  The "new" number to be sent in each QSO was displayed by the logging software, but the number received could not be predicted, and had to be copied.

The exchange (the number sent) was a pseudo-random number - with 4 digits (always 4 digits, no leading zeros) between 1000 and 9999.  This number was a repeatable combination of the previous call logged and the previous number sent.  Being repeatable lets the adjudication software identify responsibility for errors or discrepancies between logs.

The received number has to be copied and logged in real-time. Unlike serials, it is not possible to guess/generate it by listening to subsequent QSOs.  Without collusion (seeing other logs), an incorrect received number could not be "corrected".

The concept worked, but was limited by the fact that it was not supported by N1MM+.  Any appropriate algorithm will work but, for it to be accepted, the N1MM+ crew would have to lead the way.  The other contest loggers would soon follow.  Note that knowledge of exactly how the "random number" calculation is done will not help anyone who didn't copy it on air.

Here's what a "random-number" contest QSO might look like

ei5di:   EI5DI TEST

k1ki:    K1KI

ei5di:   K1KI 3906

k1ki:    7044

ei5di:   TU EI5DI

If you would more information, or to see it in operation, please contact me directly (pokane at ei5di.com), not via this mailing list.  I can demonstrate it on TeamViewer or Zoom.

How about it - who will get the ball rolling?

73,
Paul EI5DI



_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.contesting.com%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fcq-contest&data=04%7C01%7C%7C25906b710b2042449ad708d9d87af401%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637778844863926436%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=9cHj9SIMaUqclDEXux1T44c546XGRqB6AN7wmnXsRT4%3D&reserved=0