Speak Out: A post-contest accuracy report for cluster spotting?
Operating with spotting assistance is not for everyone, but for those who use it, what do you think about there being a published "accuracy" report for spots made during contests?
33 opinions on this subject.
Enter your opinion at the bottom of this page.
[Speak Out Home Page]
W0MU on 2009-02-23
It is the operators job to make sure who the station is he or she is working. Mistakes happen.
N6RNO on 2008-11-17
For club oriented contests, spotting is a
great way for us smaller stations to help
the team. We hear more stations than we can
actually work. I think most spot errors are
typos or poor hearing...and not deliberate
mistakes. It would be interesting to get a
statistical analysis of the error rate and a
full busted call analysis targeted at typos
and D/B/P type of mistakes. The analysis
should be an aggregate and not single out
who spotted (unless the error rate >> 30%
for 30+ spots)
I always listen to the exchange and log what
I hear but still get caught on B/D type
mistakes when the phonetics where not used.
On the issue of B4, work them, dups never
hurt in the log and B4 can take longer than
working them when you hear them cleanly. If
they are noisy then give a B4. Some of us
argue over the B4 because we do not have you
in our logs correct. You may end up with a
NIL because we may choose to delete the
contact completely instead of correcting our
Anonymous on 2008-08-26
Not only should they publish an accuracy report, logs should be reduced in score for the inaccuracy rate.
W5JNP on 2008-07-25
On contest that allow spots I only use them as a tool. I don't
take them for face value. I ALWAYS still listen and get the
correct call before I key the mic. Maybe if more listen before
they keyed the dups would disappear.
Spots != Truth
Anonymous on 2008-07-24
I'm all for spoff spotting. Contesters today are too dependent of the packet cluster. Why is the cluster so active even on contests where it is not allowed. Spot the fake ones and make the wennies work for it and let the real contesters earn the contacts. But hey, that's just my opinion.
k6iii on 2008-04-05
I do a lot of spotting on the DX clusters during HF contests. I'm not a big gun station and don't kid myself that I might someday be a top gun. I am, however, a member of a large west coast contest club. How can I help the group achieve their goal of big/biggest scores? I could just participate and add my moderate score to the club aggregate or I could provide alerts to the group via spots of multipliers I hear. I will also spot the group's running stations and members I hear in order to increase their visibility to the contesting world. I think it adds value to the overall experience. So I have set up my hot keys to make it easy to post a spot. Some folks will find so many spots annoying or of little value. I beg to differ.
I must of made a zillion spots in WPX SSB recently (did you notice?). With so many unique calls on the air, practically half the stations I tune across will be a multiplier of some sort or the other. Someone using a fake call sign (US2LID) did object by posting a spot with my call telling me to stop spotting. I actually did stop for a while. I discussed this with several club members and without exception they said how useful they found my spotting and to keep it up.
Do I make mistakes spotting? You bet I do, but not on purpose. I sometimes fat-finger the keyboard and hit that Enter key too quickly. I am annoyed with myself when that happens and endeavor to do better.
Self spotting should not be done. Many contest sponsors state this in their rules.
Fake spots are outrageous behavior and should not be done.
Comments like "when CW" or "When 17m" etc are a waste of time. I truely doubt that the DX/Contest station is looking at these comments.
OK.... I'm off my soapbox.... no flames, please.
PY3FJ on 2008-04-03
I have means to see who spotted me, but if the spotter sends a wrong call (just changing one letter or number) I can't see it, because isn't my call. I just feel a wrong spot when the dupes beggin to appear. So we spent precious time saying -we contacted before- instead of making contacts. This could be a spotter's mistake, but also could be malicious, trying to stop the pile-up.
Jac - PY3FJ @ PP5JD on the CQ WPX SSB Contest
dl8obf on 2008-03-31
I actually have my boubts that such a blacklist would work. Those guys who deliberately post wrong spots could be do so using arbitrary callsigns.
But obviously there must be such guys who deliberately spot wrong callsigns, or how can you misspell 30 and 3O ? During the WPX there were lots of these which are difficult to catch from the glimpsy CRT-screens :-(.
NF1R on 2008-03-22
It would be great to be able to blacklist certain spotters so that their lousy spots don't show up on the bandmap. The busted spots are often obvious, so why not let us filter out the idiots? Or is this feature already available?
wy7i on 2008-03-16
A complete waste of time. Haven't we got better things to do?
Enter your opinion about A post-contest accuracy report for cluster spotting?:
The opinions expressed within Contesting Online Speak Out are those of the
contributor, and not necessarily that of Contesting Online. Contesting Online
simply provides a forum for people to express their opinions on
various amateur radio contesting subjects of interest.
Do you have an idea for a Speak Out topic?
Email our Speak Out Manager
with your ideas.