Be sure that is NOT how cheaters proceed.
They turn on the cluster probably in a different PC via remote desktop in
some distant country or QTH, even in their smart phones.
The still manually scan the band up and down following the same pattern
unassisted ops follow. Keeping an eye on the cluster, they even wait long
before actually making the QSO. That's it.
That pattern you describe can be found in many top SO unassisted logs, and
most of them were really unassisted. Thing is, even if they are scanning
the bands up and down "Ye olde fashiones way", the second day, there are
less and less mults to QSO, so they, can be running in VFO A radio A,
scanning in VFO B radio A and all of a suden you will see a QSO with a mult
100 Khz away. That doesn't say the ops is being assisted at all!
There is NO WAY AT ALL to discover assisted ops. Period. Unless they are
really "obvious" to say the least (just a very few over the past few years
have shown such a silly pattern) and of course they got DQed.
Not only ops use packet to find QSOs, they also monitor band openings,
determine wheter to stop and call a given station or just skip it and call
it later. They use it to determine where competition is at a given point in
time (do I need to QSY or keep running here?). They use it as a tool to
"keep an ear" in their fierce rivals (is he doing better than I am?), etc.,
etc.
Like it or not. It is just like that.
Vy 73.
Martin, LU5DX
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Rex Maner <k7qq@netzero.net> wrote:
> Joe I don't know how somone would get caught , however If you were
> checking a Log you might find a station is running on 14005 at a really
> good rate then suddenly for one contact of 20 seconds makes a contact on
> 14065 of a needed mult, an then is back on 14005 CQing 25/30 sec, later.
> Now I know that some operate SO2R and are really good and could work this
> in but ???
>
> If I find this many times in a log I'm gonna look at the log VERY, VERY
> carefully.
>
> Rex K7QQ
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe" <nss@mwt.net>
> To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 3:35 PM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Non-Assisted vs. Assisted
>
>
> On 1/29/2013 10:09 AM, Hal Kennedy wrote:
>>
>> The point I'd like to make is there are really three categories: - SO -
>> SO (A) - SO (cheating A) We don't know too much about how the scores of the
>> third category stack up, but knowing of a few stations that do it
>> routinely, and who have been caught and penalized in some cases and STILL
>> continue to do it,
>>
>> I have yet to operate Assisted. Hey I just recently started to use a
>> computer to log. But i am curious, as to how does on that is claiming SO,
>> but does SOA, how do they actually get caught?
>>
>> Joe WB9SBD
>>
>>
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/**mailman/listinfo/cq-contest<http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest>
>> ______________________________**______________________________
>> Visa® Black Card™
>> Earn 25,000 Bonus Points Plus Get Exclusive Rewards: Apply Now!
>> http://thirdpartyoffers.**netzero.net/TGL3265/**
>> 51095aa164cff5a9b3c54mp01vuc<http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3265/51095aa164cff5a9b3c54mp01vuc>
>>
>>
> ______________________________**_________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/**mailman/listinfo/cq-contest<http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest>
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|