Since I am one of those whose SweepStakes exchange may be unstable from year to
year, I’ll offer my explanation why.
You may agree, or you may not agree with my rationale. No problem to me either
way. It is what it is.
So here goes.
It is my conviction that RadioSport contests should measure some skill, and
should reward those radiomen most accomplished in whatever skill is being
measured.
Different contests are arranged, deliberately or not, to measure different
skills and talents.
CQWW, as one example, measures a complex skill set which requires a good
radioman to balance high run rates against an effective harvest of multipliers,
a fine sense of propagation awareness, and knowing when to defer high run rate
on one band in order to harvest fleeting multipliers on a slower band. The
exchange of information in this contest is quite predictable, and not
challenging to copy. If you correctly copy the call sign “K0HB” then your
logging program will fill in “59 4”. In summary, CQWW measures run rate and
aggregate multiplier harvest, with less emphasis on copying the content of the
exchange.
SweepStakes has a different emphasis. Run rate is still of some importance,
especially early in the contest, but not nearly to the extent as in CQWW. The
number of multipliers in SS is miniscule compared to CQWW, only 83 vs possible
thousands in CQWW. In fact, “chasing mults” in SS is a really poor use of
time, since nearly every one except a small handful will fall into your log in
the normal course of operating for 24 hours. So high run rate and effective
multiplier harvest are NOT skills particularly measured by SS.
The challenge in SS is the ability to copy a complex exchange. SS has its
roots in traffic handling (the 5-element exchange mimics the ARRL message
header format).
In traffic handling, none of those 5 elements are predictable
message-to-message, let alone year-to-year. They are not “unchanging facts”
If SS is built to measure the ability to copy a complex and unpredictable
header, then making the exchange “predictable” devalues the very skill set we
set out reward. The more uncertainty we can introduce into the content of the
exchange, the better the contest will measure and reward those radiomen most
skilled in copying complex information accurately.
My purpose isn’t to confuse you; it is to challenge you to develop the skills
required to score high in SweepStakes.
On the other hand, you may have different fingers.
73, de Hans, KØHB
"Just a boy and his radio"™
From: Michael Clarson
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2017 9:30 PM
To: Ria Jairam
Cc: Ron Notarius W3WN; CQ-Contest Reflector
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] "It's just to save on typing"
To others following the thread: Perhaps someone can clarify: I fail
to understand why one would want to confuse those using prefills by
purposely changing information that is supposed to be an unchanging
fact -- year first licensed. Requests for repeats slow both stations
down. I guess we all contest for different reasons. --Mike, WV2ZOW
_______________________________________________
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
|