When I read the thread title "Get Rid of the Assisted Category" I get a very
rosy feeling. But then, the meaning of that phrase has a different meaning
to me than it might to the members of the "Assisted Category" who wish to be
reclassified as single operator entrants. To me, the meaning of "Get Rid of
the Assisted Category" is "Reclassify the Assisted Category as
Multioperator", as the assisted category exists only as an exception to
allow those using spotting networks to avoid being classified as
multioperator.
We have to assume that spotting networks provide an opportunity for a score
increase for their users, even if someone can drag up incontrovertable
evidence that the average single operator entrants (at any level of
achievement) who switched to the assisted category suffered a drop in their
scores. The best competitors in the Assisted Category must be using it to
their advantage, or others in the category would beat them.
The reality is obvious: those who regularly or exclusively enter in the
Assisted Category would like to have their scores compared to the single
operator entrants who do not, because they believe they will fare well in
that comparison. They believe that spotting networks give them an
advantage, and they are probably correct. Reading past contest results
leads them to believe that they would fare well if they were in a combined
Assisted/Single Operator category. What they overlook is that the highly
successful operators in the single operator category, if forced to directly
compete against those using spotting networks, would undoubtedly begin to
use spotting networks.
I concur with Tree that the most successful operators would prefer not to be
compelled to use spotting networks in order to compete. I would like to
hazard a guess, and suggest that those operators who presently excel without
using spotting networks would probably surprise the present-day Assisted
Category operators both in how quickly and how effectively they adapt to the
new reality. Because highly competitive contesting is enabled by operating
skills, I'd imagine that those who have already demonstrated superior
operating skills without spotting networks would probably make superior use
of spotting networks -- if forced to do so to compete.
The result of improperly combining the Assisted Category into single
operator category would therefore result in dramatic disappointment for
those present practitioners of the Assisted Category. Let's face it,
assisted operators, the last thing you want to do is compete against scores
that are 20% higher than the present day single operator class. I hope
you're thinking clearly enough to realize that.
But, if you are in the Single Operator category, and simply wish that the
Assisted Category would again be combined into the Multioperator Category,
where, of course, it truly belongs, then it makes sense that you'd continue
to post messages under the thread "Get Rid of the Assisted Category".
KR6X
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tree" <tree@kkn.net>
To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 2:45 PM
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Incorrect conclusions about un-assisted versus
assisted
>
> NS3T writes:
>
>> My argument would be - even when you let the guys use spots
>> enter the same single op category - the UN-assisted ops would do better.
>>
>> My apologies for clouding things. Get rid of the assisted category...
>> very little would change about who wins.
>
> When I see this comment - I just have to jump up and down and make as much
> noise as I can - as it is the totally wrong conclusion to jump to.
>
> The reason that you see typically lower un-assisted scores at the top is
> simple. The large percentage of the top operators are NOT using
> assistance.
>
> If you banish the distinction between the two - you have now put the top
> operators into the position of having to adopt the technology in order to
> not lose to other top operators who are adopting it.
>
> There is just not a way that having information at your fingertips telling
> you where multipliers are hiding does not have a positive imapct on your
> score. I know when I was at HC8N, that the times we did have packet spots
> showing up - I used that information to allow me to pounce on mults
> without
> having to lose my run frequency to troll for them myself.
>
> The top operators like the challenge of finding the mults on their own,
> and
> the fact that the competition in the unassisted category is tougher proves
> that point.
>
> Tree N6TR
> tree@kkn.net
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|