[UK-CONTEST] Progressing in Contesting

[G3SJJ]

You hit the point Bob. Sure if we were competing against D4B or CT1BOH 
etc running at 40 wpm for 48 hours in CQWW. It could be several more 
QSOs and some mults as well so in that respect you are correct, and 
therefore long live competition. What really highlighted me against the 
growing trend though was finding out that Win Test actually has speeded 
up sections as default. An unsuspecting user will assume that either 
that is the norm or that it will give him an advantage, which it won't 
unless he is in the D4B etc scenario. In fact it could work against him 
since many people find speeding up irritating and a casual caller might 
not bother. It's all about marketing yourself to the best advantage. The 
software should have it as an option for when an operator thinks it 
could be useful, but not as a norm. Can you really say that in 
Commonwealth Contest, for example, a UK station averaging 10-15 QSOs per 
hour, if he is lucky, could find any advantage in speeding up Test or 
5NN!!??  Option Yes, norm No.

Anyway, a good topic for discussion over a few beers, and that's well 
overdue!

Chris G3SJJ


Bob Henderson wrote:
> Surely the clue is in the title of these events.  Several definitions of the 
> word can be found but I prefer the following....
>
> Contest...A struggle between rivals.
>
> And so it should be but with behaviour bounded by a requirement to adhere to 
> the conditions of one's license and the rules of the event.
>
> Contest reflectors are forever overflowing with suggestions that behaviour 
> should be further bounded by a panoply of constraints, inter alia..
>
> Both calls should be sent by both stations for a qso to be valid.
> Accurate reports should be exchanged because a default 5nn is worthless.
> No part of the exchange should be speeded up as this constitutes poor 
> operating practice.
> Cut numbers should never be used.
> Only cut numbers for 9 and 0 should be allowed
>
> etc etc etc
>
> I love these folks.  They bound their own activity with a bunch of arbitrary 
> constraints and then take to the reflectors to bleat about others not 
> following suit.
>
> So long as a contestant complies with the requirements of his license and 
> the rules of the event the rest is up to his own judgement and discretion. 
> For example...
>
> A decision on whether to send EEN or not might reasonably be based on 
> whether it is likely to be interpreted accurately in a high enough number of 
> cases to make an advantage out of its use compared to the alternatives of 
> 599 or 5NN.  Assuming, of course, there is any benefit in it being received 
> accurately in the first place.
>
> A decision on whether to speed up a required element of an exchange which 
> conveys no intelligence, might reasonably be made upon time saved versus 
> confusion caused.
>
> The above are examples not prescriptions.  Thank goodness we have some 
> discretion over how we target our objective.
>
> Long live the tradition of contesting and long may it remain a struggle 
> between rivals.  Once it ceases to be so, then what is it?
>
> Bob, 5B4AGN, P3F
>
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>
>