CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

[CQ-Contest] Assisted vs Unassisted

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Assisted vs Unassisted
From: Jeff Clarke <ku8e@bellsouth.net>
Date: Fri, 08 May 2015 23:28:56 -0400
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Since people aren't playing by the rules maybe CQ should get tough and consider 
changing the single operator unassisted transmitter class to something similar 
to rule 3.4.4 that is used for ARRL DX :

http://www.arrl.org/arrl-dx

I know this would be very unpopular to those who like to do SO2R. Note I'm not 
anti-SO2R because I do it myself.  Maybe even consider changing assisted to 
only work multipliers on the 2nd radio, similar to the current multi-single 
rules for CQWW. That would allow some type of SO2R for those who like operating 
a contest that way.

On a positive side it would probably eliminate any question whether someone 
claiming single-op is really operating in that category. By looking at a log 
for someone doing dual CQ's you really can't prove one operator is doing all 
the operating anyway. Plus it would be easier to figure out if someone is 
cheating by using a spotting network because a lot of the multipliers would be 
worked when doing a band change. It would be easy to compare those QSO to the 
archives of the spots during a contest.

It would probably make the log checkers job easier as there is probably a lot 
of effort being expended in identifying cheaters.

Jeff
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>