[UK-CONTEST] RST - who needs it?

[Paul O'Kane]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bob Henderson" <bob at cytanet.com.cy>

> I'm only responding to this because you claim you are being
> serious in your suggestion.  Had you not done so, I would
> have been convinced you were having a laugh.

I was 100% serious.  However, I made the mistake of taking it two
steps forwards (or backwards, depending on your point of view)
rather than one.

We're all agreed that the major contests require RST to be sent
and received - or so they say in the rules.

In practice, it can be somewhat different.

I remember the time when it was normal to vary RST.  The rot set
in, in particular, in the late-80s when CT was introduced and did
not have the facility to vary RST Sent.

Since then, anything other than 59(9) is or has been unusual. It
doesn't matter what value you log for RST Sent or Received in the
major contests because these fields are not cross-checked by the
organisers - and that's fact.

The result is that RST in major contests has no significance,
value, or meaning.

Just to stick with CW contests for a moment - there was a time
when 599 was sent in full.  These days, 5NN is the norm.  Soon,
ENN will be the norm. After all, if it's good enough for CT1BOH,
it's good enough for the rest of us.  In my previous post I went
one step further and suggested didahdidahdit - ENN without the
gaps.  I should have stopped there.

> However that it appears irrelevant is in itself an irrelevance
> if the rules call for you to send it.

Maybe, just maybe, the RST rule is a little dated? 

> Contests are simple things.  If the rules state your exchange
> must have particular content then you should see to it that it
> does or risk disqualification.

When I'm trying to draw attention to what (to some of us) is self-
evidently an obsolete and irrelevant part of the exchange, I'm
quite prepared to risk disqualification.  In CQWW (both phone and
CW) a couple of years ago I had a total of some 700 QSOs in which
I sent no RS(T) whatsoever.  In my entries I stated what I had done
and specifically invited disqualification.  I wasn't disqualified. 

> The rules for some contests say RST must be exchanged while
> others say it need not.

Presumably you stick to the rules, so let's hear what RST shortcuts
you think are OK and what ones, if any, contravene the rules - as
you interpret them. 

1.  Do you give "real" reports?  If not, why not?  Isn't RST
    intended to signify Readability, Signal Strength and Tone?    
2.  Do you send 599 in full?  If not, why not?
3.  If you send 5NN, is it OK to send this faster than the rest
    of the exchange.  If so, why?
4.  Is it OK to send ENN?  If not, why not?
5.  If someone sends you anything other than 599, do you log
    it, or just leave the 599 the software has already entered?
6.  If it is OK to send ENN, is it OK to send it faster, and to
    reduce the spacing between letters to save time?  If not,
    why not?

I maintain that none of the above options or practices contravenes
the "rules". Does anyone think otherwise?

I'm not sugesting anyone should break the rules - I'm trying to
highlight the absurdity of a rule which requires every entrant to
send, receive and log, for every QSO, an invariant, meaningless
and redundant combination of characters.

73,
Paul EI5DI