[UK-CONTEST] CQ WW webinar 21st October

[Chris G3SJJ]

Olof, I would guess that the ease of being able to submit a cabrillo log by email has contributed to the increase.

It seems to me totally irresponsible encouraging entrants to submit a log without checking it first. RSGB HF Contests have quite rightly always 
encouraged us to check. There could be all kinds of problems which need rectifying before submission. It also should be remembered not all of us are 
highly trained keyboard operators. I will always check my log before I submit it. If I can't do it any 5 days because I am ill, on holiday, away on 
business, doing DIY or any other normal non-radio activity then I won't bother sending it at all.

Like you say, it's suppose to be fun, but then, us UK b'stards need a wuppin'!

73 Chris G3SJJ

>
> On 22/10/2012 10:42, Olof Lundberg wrote:
>> That's a good summary Chris. I'll add a couple of points to your list:
>>
>> 5. They will now check the zones. If you work a W6 and you or SCP/exchange
>> guessing fills in zone 3 but he is in zone 5 you will lose the QSO but there
>> will be no penalty.
>> 6. He re-emphasized that we should just work the dupes and not mess around
>> with 'worked before' and such
>>
>> I was also impressed by the increase in the number of logs submitted that
>> they have seen. If I didn't misread the diagram it looked like the logs have
>> doubled in the last 5 years in spite of a sun that has been less than
>> cooperative. I wonder whether the number of logs from G have doubled in the
>> same period?
>>
>> I have absolutely no problem with the principle of not trying to correct the
>> log after the contest is over but I believe they are chasing the end of the
>> rainbow there. We already have CTY files, call composition checkers and SCP
>> and exchange guessing in real time. I see nothing that would prevent a
>> moderately software-astute competitor to add real-time checks against
>> qrz.com and RBN and the cluster and against uniques and so forth. If I
>> invest many hours in the contest proper I could at any rate not see myself
>> spending even more time after the contest to find what would be very few
>> mistakes.
>>
>> I wouldn't disagree with the idea of catching cheaters and name and shame
>> them. But generally I think we are on a dangerous track when we take the
>> competitive aspect too seriously. Contests should be fun. Keep the US
>> lawyers inside the US borders, don't export them please. There is very
>> little absolute fairness in radio contesting at any rate. Given two
>> identically good operators or teams, the station with bigger antennas or a
>> more quiet location or a more rare multiplier or with more points per qso or
>> in a location with better ionospheric propagation would always win.
>>
>> 73 Olof G0CKV
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: UK-Contest [mailto:uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
>> Chris Tran GM3WOJ
>> Sent: 22 October 2012 10:20
>> To: uk-contest at contesting.com
>> Subject: [UK-CONTEST] CQ WW webinar 21st October
>>
>> Hello all
>>
>> Last evening's webinar by the new CQ WW Director, Randy K5ZD was
>> interesting. About 200 people were logged on for the 60 minute presentation.
>>
>> I saw a few UK names in the list of those listening and watching.
>>
>> The key messages I took from this were :
>>
>> 1. The new CQ WW rules are targeting cheating more aggressively. Dodgy
>> practices have been going on for years but many are more identifiable
>> nowadays. CQ WW have 7 SDR sites around the world which will record every
>> QSO made by every entrant. Obviously only questionable QSOs from
>> high-scoring entrants will actually be checked.
>>
>> 2.  All log alterations must be done during the contest, not post-contest.
>> I guess this helps to explain the new 5-day log submission rule.  This
>> places the onus on the operator(s) to log accurately when making the QSO or
>> be penalised.
>>
>> 3.  Randy thinks that excessive power will eventually destroy the CQ
>> contests unless things are brought back under control.
>>
>> 4.  You can use the Cabrillo X-QSO command to mark a QSO as invalid in your
>> logfile (for whatever reason) - do not delete any QSOs from your log before
>> submission.
>>
>> I think the audio + slides are now available online for those interested.
>>
>> 73
>> Chris
>> GM3WOJ
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>