[UK-CONTEST] IARU Contest: Level playing-field?

Thu Jul 20 03:15:28 EDT 2006

I'm not quite ready to give up on this yet, despite there being nobody who 
felt able or willing or motivated to proffer an opinion in response to the 
series of questions I raised in earlier submissions.

We should all recognise and accept that there is no contest with a truly 
level playing field.  WRTC uses best endeavours to approximate the same but 
even that suffers from some variation.  The important issue is not about 
level playing field but about sportsmanship or if you like, ethical 
contesting.

I believe this is of paramount significance in the IARU contest.  Why? Well 
the IARU is the superior co-ordinating body for the interests of radio 
amateurs world-wide and if leadership is not shown from there then just from 
where exactly should it emanate?

Contesting should not be a free for all, where those who circumvent the 
rules and spirit of events are then hailed as champions.  This makes no 
sense at all and strangles the very heart of contesting.

Clear guidance should be offered defining the difference between the kind of 
marketing which is acceptable in the interests of event promotion and that 
which is not because it strays into generating pre-event advantage for a 
particular competitor.  Put another way, promoting an event is good and 
pre-contest solicitation of contacts is not.

A specific example of what should be acceptable and what should not follows:

Were an IARU member society to offer awards for participation in the event 
to those who made say 100Q with a minimum of 50 stations and 200Q with a 
minimum of 75 or something similar, this would be an activity which promoted 
the event and contesting in general.  In other words this would be good.  On 
the other hand were such a member society to offer an award for working 
their own HQ station on 12 band slots, that would be blatant pre-contest 
solicitation and while this might promote activity in the event it would 
undermine the integrity of contesting.  This would be BAD.

>From the CQ-Contest reflector

"DA0HQ is organising a "pseudo" sprint during the 24
hrs IARU RADIO "SPORT" contest with only 1 station
that must(can) be worked ...DA0HQ in both CW and Phone
and this in 5 categories . Nice free AWARD as reward
for hunting down DA0HQ on all bands in 2
modes.....Maybe the website will be empty tonight ."

Apparently DARC have run this parallel event for some years.  Anyone who 
thinks this is OK is very short sighted.  It is not OK and the IARU should 
provide specific guidance which makes this clear.  Without this, we signal 
to all contesters that pre-contest solicitation of contacts is an honourable 
and valid pursuit.  It is not and it fundamentally undermines that which 
contesting is intended to be about - OPERATING SKILL.

Bob, 5B4AGN

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Keith Kerr" <k.kerr at abdn.ac.uk>
To: "Gerard Lynch" <gerrylynch at freenetname.co.uk>
Cc: <uk-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 1:54 PM
Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] IARU Contest: Level playing-field?

> Gerry,
> I think this sums it up nicely. Well put.
>
> Given the diversity of geographic locations and variation is propagation,
> this mythical Utopian 'level playing field' is never going to happen, 
> period.
>
> Short of inventing calls or some organised 'only call DA0HQ' ploy ....(all
> speculation. Is there any evidence?) the DL guys have not done anything
> wrong as far as I can see. There may be some understandable patriotism
> though it would be highly regrettable if no-one else got called. If there
> is some queue of DL or SP or whatever hams lined outside a club station or
> worse still, one op calling from a call book then I just wonder about 
> their
> motivation. Sure hope they are proud of their 'win'. Again, is there
> evidence that this actually happens.
>
> The reality is surely that the DL ham population is more motivated and
> contest-minded that many others, perhaps aided by a sense of patriotism 
> and
> the organisation of a national award scheme. Well done them IMHO. As a
> contester I am glad for all the DLs and SPs, OKs and EAs who call in large
> numbers in many contests. Truth is that for whatever reason, a substantial
> proportion of the 60k UK hams are just not interested enough to start
> joining in or, more likely, switch of and go to the allotment when they
> hear 'CQ Contest'. As someone observed recently, just look at the number 
> of
> entries from different countries in CQWW for example. Does contesting get
> more publicity in DL through magazines?
>
> IF this issue requires a solution, surely it should be by adjustment 
> rather
> than banning anything.
>
> I agree that the HQ stations in EU can occupy a large amount of spectrum
> (see K3BU earlier) but most major contests attract big stations which fill
> the bands. Perhaps the M2 or MS option is worth revisiting (vaguely recall
> it used to be like that but maybe not?) but I'm uncomfortable about 
> killing
> activity.
>
> Don't ban same-country QSOs ( country or jurisdiction of National society,
> with the UK in mind? ) but the points differential could be adjusted (and
> as I type this I can hear, and understand, the replies from NA and JA
> regarding distance vs country borders. Maybe we should make states and
> provinces multipliers!!).
>
> Contest activity is A-GOOD-THING. Let's think before we cap it.
>
> Keith GM4YXI
>
>
>
> At 09:44 18/07/2006 +0100, Gerard Lynch wrote:
>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Contesting" <contesting at m5aav.org.uk>
>>
>> > And I trust that this information has been passed on to the Contest
>> > Organisers ?
>>
>>Not only has it been 'passed on' to the contest organisers, but DA0HQ and
>>SN0HQ have both been commended in the official results for encouraging 
>>such
>>wide participation from their national amateurs.
>>
>> > Perhaps it is time that QSO's with ones own Country were not counted ?
>>
>>I know this is going to make me as popular as catching crabs, but I don't
>>agree (and don't see what DA0HQ have done wrong, actually).
>>
>>Every contest has a set of rules, and every contest, with the arguable
>>exception of WRTC, is *not* a level playing field.  Every one has distinct
>>geographical advantages and disadvantages.  In pretty much any contest, I
>>could go back to my parents' house in Belfast, string a doublet from their
>>roof to the one of the guy behind us, and score more points than I can 
>>with
>>my 100 Watts and doublet does in London.
>>
>>Even better, I can jump on a plane to Bodrum, operate as TA3/G0RTN and get
>>an even bigger score.
>>
>>All DA0HQ has done is exploit those advantages in the rules (unique
>>advantages, given that Germany is totally impossible to win anything from,
>>even Eu, in any other contest).
>>
>>So, let's say we get rid of in-country QSOs.  What happens then?  Well,
>>no-one can beat R9HQ because those crafty Russians have contrived to have 
>>a
>>continental boundary running through their country and can work gazillions
>>of Eus on 80 for 5 points a go.  Or URE will twig that if they set up shop
>>in the Canaries, they're in five point heaven.  So then, everyone will 
>>start
>>whingeing about how unfair it is that no-one can beat them.
>>
>>Just look at the CQ-Contest reflector after CQ WW - full of people from 
>>Ohio
>>and Arkansas moaning about how biased the contest rules are towards the 
>>East
>>Coast (and inaccurately moaning about how Europeans can work each other 
>>for
>>2 points a go on 80 when they only live in the next street).  If it's that
>>big a deal, move to Massachussets.  Or Germany.
>>
>>Every contest has an in built geographical bias.  Move to point per
>>kilometre scoring for big HF contests (which some moot as 'fairer') and 
>>then
>>ZD8 or LU will be the unbeatable places, and big contest groups will be
>>eyeing up real estate in the Falklands.
>>
>>I think the total amateur population in DL is around 80,000 versus around
>>60,000 here (correct me if I'm wrong), and the population is also 
>>~80M:60M.
>>But the number of QSOs you make in *any* operating event is significantly
>>higher in favour of DL than this 4:3 ratio.  Very simply, Germany produces
>>more active amateurs than the UK does, and gets more of them to work its 
>>HQ
>>station in the IARU contest.
>>
>>I'd rather discuss how we can close that gap, and close the points gap in
>>other ways than moan about how "we wuz robbed (by those crafty 
>>furriners)".
>>I don't think the gap *in points terms* is uncloseable on the current
>>figures.
>>
>>And one final thought - ARRL, JARL and CRSA always put on a big effort for
>>this contest even though there's no way you can even come close to winning
>>it from the States or the Far East.  I think that's what we call ham 
>>spirit,
>>isn't it?
>>
>>73
>>
>>Gerry G0RTN
>>Vanity Page at http://www.gerrylynch.co.uk
>>"In days of old, when ops were bold, and sidebands not invented,
>>The word would pass, by pounding brass, and all were well contented."
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>UK-Contest mailing list
>>UK-Contest at contesting.com
>>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>
> 