EI5DI wrote...and I appreciate the depth of consideration...
> Here's some hard stuff not covered by the rules.
>
> 1. My buddy calls on 10m to tell me the band is open
> to the Pacific - no spots, just general advice. I
> turn the beam and, sure enough, pick up a few mults.
> That's single-op assisted in my book. Is it covered
> in the CQ definition? I say "no", because I'm the
> only operator. Others may say it is covered - but
> so long as there is wriggle room, some people will
> interpret the rules as they prefer - and with a
> clear conscience.
That's not Single-Op Assisted, that's (technically) Multioperator. The
definition of "Assisted" in both CQ and ARRL contests is specifically
limited to spotting assistance, with "spot" presumably defined as a complete
identification of call sign, frequency, and time. "Assisted" category does
not cover all forms of "assistance" - as I discuss in this evening's issue
of the Contester's Rate Sheet. Multioperator is the appropriate category
for someone who receives operating (transmitting or receiving) assistance,
including general advice, beyond spot information.
> 2. I check with a real-time scoreboard and see that
> other stations in my category are doing much better
> on 40m - so I do something about it. Again, that's
> single-op assisted in my book, and it's not covered
> in the CQ definition.
Same issue with "Assisted" category versus "assistance." Real-time
scoreboards are new and the jury is still out on whether this is considered
assistance or not. What's the difference between using a real-time
scoreboard and seeing an Announce message from N0AX with my QSO totals on 40
meters? Very grey area. Both are currently permitted under Single-Op
rules.
> 3. I run some propagation software with the latest
> data accessed in real-time from the internet. It
> tells me to expect a long-path opening, right now,
> to JA from my QTH. Guess what - it's right!
I believe that the consensus of contesters is that this falls into the
category of personal expertise in building an effective and efficient
station. This should not affect entry category. Point of fact, I was
watching the DX Atlas propagation map this past weekend and it was often in
error, so this is not always "helpful."
> That's why I proposed the term "external assistance"
> http://lists.contesting.com/pipermail/cq-contest/2006-November/071164.html
> in an attempt to catch any practices not specifically
> addressed under "operating, logging and spotting".
Maybe what you really mean here is "Single-Op Naked" (tongue-in-cheek...um,
maybe a poor visualization...sorry). I believe the intent of both Assisted
and Multioperator categories is the degree of assistance received *from
other competitors during the contest* and not whatever tools and information
sources one is able to integrate into the station. Contests should
encourage an operator to improve their knowledge of and capabilities within
the "radio art" and making use of solar data certainly accomplishes that.
(Yes, I know one could claim that we should all have to learn it the
old-fashioned way, cycle after cycle...) How about a "Single-Op
Disconnected" such as the teams in WRTC that are prohibited from connection
to the Internet or the use of any communications means outside the contest
bands and modes? (Which means no listening to WWV or SW BC stations for
propagation cues...)
My feeling is that the existing rules are pretty good, with some improved
definitions and explanatory rationale or guidelines needed. One can always
run a Contest Within A Contest for any additional constraints one might
choose to adopt.
73, Ward N0AX
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|