The WAE and Russian DX Contest (and a number of other European contests)
have already done this. They might lose entries for the first few years as
people protest the change and then things return to normal.
The biggest losers in this approach are the guys who do enjoy operating in
the classic fashion (just their ears and their radios). If you look at logs
submitted, they are in the majority and usually at the top of the
competitors so their stake in this decision should not be taken lightly.
I kind of like the idea that some contests mix everything together and some
don't. CQ WW, as the major DX contest of the world, should stay with
tradition. Others may have more room to experiment.
Randy, K5ZD
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> Dennis McAlpine
> Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2008 2:41 PM
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] FW: Why have different classes at all?
>
>
>
>
>
> A quick look at the results for any major contest will show
> that the highest scores are from the unassisted ops and the
> assisted ops are generally lagging. True, the assisted ops
> usually have more mults but the top ops know that they will
> get enough mults and the key is to keep the QSO rate up.
> The skill of the unassisted op more than makes up for the
> assistance that the assisted op receives, be it from packet,
> skimmer or whatever. So what benefit did the assisted guy
> actually receive? In reality, he probably got suckered into
> chasing mults resulting in the loss of a bunch of QSOs which
> resulted in a lower score. (Notice all this nice repetition).
>
>
>
> Probably the biggest boon to all of us is Super Check
> Partial. How many times have you struggled to pull a call
> out of the mud and then still missed a letter or two. But, a
> quick look at F12 and you have the answer, or at least a
> pretty good guess. Now, that list was prepared by K5ZD, not
> you the operator. So why doesn't that make you "assisted"?
>
>
>
> Part of the skill of being a good contester is integrating
> the technology into the operation to achieve the maximum
> score. Sometimes, the technology can hurt rather than help.
> If it does help, then everyone will eventually adopt it,
> whether or not they admit it.
>
>
>
> So, enough of this endless debate. Let's just throw all of
> us in together (except for power categories) and let the
> chips fall where they may. Let's see if those guys with
> skimmers and packet can figure out how to beat the CQers. My
> guess is the same guys will continue to be at the top after
> some gestation period.
>
>
>
> If you are worried about not having a category to win, let's
> give everyone a certificate. The technology exists to send
> out a computer certificate that the op can print on his own
> printer. (See the WAG results, for example). It can include
> where he placed in some category, the score, his call, name,
> etc. It will save the sponsor the time and money of printing
> and mailing all those certificates and we will all have some
> wallpaper. Why, the certificate might even look prettier
> than some of those pieces of paper we now receive.
>
>
>
> A number of years ago, N6TR had a computer operated station
> with no human intervention. It made a few QSOs in Field Day,
> as I remember. I don't remember the computer being
> classified as "assisted." I wonder what it could do now
> given all the new technology? Come on Tree, dust the cobwebs
> off that thing and let's see what it can do today.
>
>
>
> So, how about it? Sweepstakes can become our version of the
> U.S.Open. CQ WW can become the World Open. Who will be the
> next Tiger Woods? Bring on all the technology and let's see
> if it makes a difference.
>
>
>
> See you all in the packet pileups.
>
>
>
> 73,
>
>
>
> Dennis, K2SX
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|