As much as I am ambivalent on the issue of real-time scoreboards, perhaps
someone could enlighten me:
How does a real-time scoreboard provide an unfair advantage?
Or, how does it provide any more of an unfair advantage than when a hockey
team can look at the scoreboard and see they're losing?
Does a scoreboard offer anything more than running scores? I can see if
there was enough info there to make it a back door to spotting assistance,
or to assistance in band choice, but I can't see how seeing that another
station is winning or losing is anything more than the hockey example above.
That said, I don't think I agree with the sentiment towards making
contesting more like a video game. Once you make that leap, it's not far
from being able to get rid of the radio.
73, kelly
ve4xt
----- Original Message -----
From: "N7MAL" <N7MAL@CITLINK.NET>
To: <eric@k3na.org>; <live@cqww.com>
Cc: "Cq-Contest" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2006 6:24 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] real time scoreboards
> Eric you said: ""Allowing single operator stations to have more fun in
> contests seems
> beneficial to our beloved sport. And encouraging part-time participants
> to operate more of the contest also seems beneficial.""
> Those were the same kind of excuses that were used in the early days of
the
> DX Packet Cluster and look at that hornets nest now. Any outside system
> being utilized whether it be clusters or scoreboards or whatever will
always
> provide an unfair advantage. Like the Cluster I can assure you it will not
> be policed and some stations utilizing it to their advantage will not
report
> its use.
> Now before I get beat up to badly I realize the overwhelming majority of
> contesters are upstanding and play by the rules. It's always that bad
apples
> that spoil it. Eventually like the Clusters the good guys will tired of
no
> action against the bad guys and then just like the clusters even the most
> honest upstanding guys will begin to sneak a peek once in awhile. I'm all
> for modern technology but if it's not going to be policed and controlled
> then it will also be another Cluster.
> 73
>
> MAL
> N7MAL
> BULLHEAD CITY, AZ
> http://www.ctaz.com/~suzyq/N7mal.htm
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Eric Scace K3NA
> To: live@cqww.com
> Cc: Cq-Contest
> Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2006 16:30
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] real time scoreboards
>
>
> Thanks for polling the contesting community before taking a decision
> on whether to classify the use of real-time scoreboards as "outside
> assistance" for single ops.
>
> Having used the real time scoreboard in some contests this year, I
> can report that:
> 1. It was fun! I enjoyed the heightened sense of competition, trying
> to catch up to the station just ahead of me in the standings and to stay
> ahead of the person just behind me.
> 2. In a contest where I was making a part-time effort, the real time
> scoreboard encouraged me to participate longer in the contest.
> 3. As an experienced contester, the availability of band-by-band
> snapshots had no material impact on my score or strategy.
>
> Allowing single operator stations to have more fun in contests seems
> beneficial to our beloved sport. And encouraging part-time participants
> to operate more of the contest also seems beneficial.
>
> An experienced, top-tier SOAB contester will already know on which
> bands she should be operating to maximize his score. The real-time
> scoreboard will not give her significant new data that she would not be
> able to determine (more efficiently) on her own.
>
> For an operator new to the sport, real time scoreboards seem to offer
> more encouragement, minute-by-minute, to continue competing against
> other operators at about his skill level.
>
> Overall it seems to me the benefits of a laissez-faire policy seem to
> outweigh any disadvantages for the SO-unassisted category.
>
> Furthermore, why rush to kill or reclassify a new-born idea at this
> early stage, when little actual experience has been gained? As
> real-time scoreboards develop over the next few years, the Committee can
> re-evaluate their impact (if any) on the SO-unassisted category.
>
>
> 73,
> -- Eric K3NA
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.9/490 - Release Date:
10/20/2006
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|