CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] improving pileup efficiency (was NOT ID'ing every

To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] improving pileup efficiency (was NOT ID'ing every
From: "Eric Hilding" <dx35@hilding.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2006 14:28:58 -0800
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Doug, KR2Q, wrote:

> As long as the CQer has callers, he "saves times" (aka, increases his rate) 
> by not
> giving his callsign.  And if the pileup is huge, he can be more efficient by 
> thinning it
> out by NOT signing rather than keeping it huge or even growing, thereby 
> REDUCING
> the number of  full calls he can copy at one time.

An erroneous assumption that exists in all of this is that the "pileup" always 
consists of the same group of stations calling until the pileup dwindles.

In reality, if the DX station doesn't I.D. frequently enough, *some* of those 
callers will bail out, and a new flock of callers take their place in the mix.  
In the latter case, if not the result of a new packet spot (probably true 
"Single Operator UN-Assisted" types who found the station via S&P), a new group 
of people to potentially "bail" after 3 Non-ID QSOs exists.  Especially, for 
those selfish DX stations who only ID once every 10 QSOs and people have gotten 
sucked into QSX for whatever *their* individual tolerance thresholds may be.

Of course the reason for the DX station(s) to not frequently ID is to selfishly 
improve their own rate(s), via the UN-Sportsmanlike Conduct of making umpteen 
other people waste their valuable time with a resultant drop in their rate(s).  
Is it fair for one person to make 25, 50, 100 or perhaps more others sit there 
waiting an unreasonable length of time for a callsign?  Absolutely not.  It's 
really a form of cheating.

Kudos to Stellar Contest operations like PJ2T, et.al.  I don't think I've ever 
heard them fail to ID after every QSO, and they still win big-time. 

Contesting is not a perfect world, of course.   IMHO, the max number of QSOs 
between ID's should be 3, but 2 is even better (for the reasons set forth 
above).  ID'ing after every QSO is best.  But not ID'ing for 10 QSOs is pure 
crap.  If by chance I've weakened and found myself sucked in to the QSX game 
for more than 3 QSOs, I usually bail, but usually "blacklist" the frequency for 
a while.  If I hear the same signal there a bit later, and even a callsign 
after waiting 2 or 3 QSOs (and can tell it's the same selfish operator), I 
simply spin-the-dial again and do NOT work them.  I've heard that others may 
work these Non-ID'ing DX stations and later delete the QSOs from the log, but I 
haven't gotten that radial.

FWIW & 73...

Rick, K6VVA

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>