eHam Logo

 Home Home
 Articles & Stories
 Contesting Wiki
 My Profile

 This Week's Contests
 Classified Ads
 Contest Links
 Product Reviews

Contest Lists

Other Lists

 Mailing List FAQs

Site Information
 About This Site Team

Contesting Online Survey

Survey Question Current Survey Question

Recently the RDXC committee reclassified P3F to high power from low power without publicly providing strong evidence that any infraction had occurred. They concluded was that the contestant was running HP on 80/40m but not full-time, just 10 minutes here and there without any convincing evidence. It appears they used the RBN as their source of information. Should the RXDC contest have to publicly provide convincing evidence before reclassifying a station from LP to HP?

Recent Surveys

Randy, K5ZD, wrote a sidebar titled " Convergence and Change" in the 2015 CQWW CW printed results in CQ magazine. He wrote that the "convergence of personal computers, Internet access, DX clusters, and CW Skimmer have changed the nature of CW contesting". He goes to say that it is "more difficult to police the line between the single operator working alone and those who are using the assistance of DX spotting." In light of this convergence and change is it time to recombine SO and SOA into a single category?

What's your primary Software for HF Contests ? ( no VHF/UHF ! )

Are you ready the this year's winter contest season

What ways have you found to be effective to attract newcomers to our hobby?

What is your linear?

View All Survey Questions

Have a good idea for a Contesting Online Survey question?
Enter your idea!

The IARU HF Championship rules say "4.1.3. Use of spotting nets, packet, or multi-channel decoders (such as CW Skimmer) is not permitted. Single-operator stations that use spotting nets, packet or multi-channel decoders will be reclassified to the Multi-operator, Single Transmitter category" Do you think the IARU should have a Single Operator Assisted or Single Operator Unlimited category like the ARRL DX contest?
  Posted: Jul 16, 2012   (153 votes, 8 comments) by VE5ZX

  Definitely Yes
  Not sure
  Definitely No
  Don't know
  Don't care
    (153 votes, 8 comments)
Survey Results
Definitely Yes 59% (91)
Perhaps 11% (17)
Not sure 1% (2)
Definitely No 18% (28)
Don't know 0% (0)
Don't care 10% (15)

Survey Comments
UNIQUE Single Op
I hope ALL contests with a UNIQUE Single-
Operator category. Today, IMO, both actual
criteria for Single-Op and Single-Op Assisted
are anachronistic and results are affected by a
lot of "dark" logs. I'd like the two categories
merged into a more realistic unique SINGLE-OP

Posted by IT9BLB on August 30, 2012

Reality is: separating categories using a criteria that cannot be fully proved, makes room for cheaters to cheat, as it has been the case since the inception of the assisted categories. Think right: do like WAE contest organizers. Packet is allowed for all categories. If you use it or not it is just a matter of your likes and dislikes. But no one will be cheating over other fellow contesters. Someone using packet is not an internet contester. It is just a contester using a tool that presents information. We could have used the same way of thinking when computer logging was introduced, saying that those who used it were not real contesters, but computer contesters, taking advantage of auto duping, super check partial features, automatic cw sending and all the stuff the logging software does for the op. Logging software represents a whole lot bigger assistance than packet itself.

Posted by LU5DX on August 18, 2012

Radio skills NOT Internet asistance...
As yet I am NOT active re contesting but am planning on taking part using CW + RADIO skills as a FUN way of enjoying the hobby and developing my capabilities as an operator after being inactive for a long time. If aids (categories) such as the survey questions introduced, then (in my opinion) the game changes for the worse and maybe one I will not want to play...

Posted by ZS6RN on August 13, 2012

I voted no, personally I'd vote for no spotting of any sort in any contest. These are supposed to be RADIO competitions, not PC/Internet competitions.

Further more I think SO2R operations should be placed in the mulit-transmitter class in all competitions.

One transmitter, one operator, no assistance, anything more should be in some other class.

Posted by KZ5A on July 28, 2012

Use of Skimmer or RBN could definitely put up the rate of SO stations. Higher rate makes more fun.

73 Slaw SP2LNW

Posted by SP2LNW on July 25, 2012

I wonder how many people used assistance and
simply didn't report it because there was no
suitable category for it. No single op wants
to compete with Multi stations just because
he checked cluster spots. There may be many
reasons for cluster use, for example to find
DX contacts for diplomas during the contest.
I used it to help learn SO2R. I would leave
unassisted HP category where the top SO's
usually compete and allow the rest to use a
cluster or skimmer with no penalty.

Posted by k3it on July 18, 2012

keep it as it is
Voted “No”. Hopefully this keep more Single Op participants from using a DX cluster. Really see no fun in cluster stimulated pile-ups in contests like CQWW DX. IMO, time to get a DX contest where no cluster will be allowed at all.

Posted by vk2imm on July 17, 2012

assisted in IARU
Heard from several that their time was limited, so they would get on to just "hand out a few" and hopefully snag a couple of needed DX. If they use the cluster, they will be classified as Multi-single, and the sponsor will probably never see their logs. Since more logs = better checking, let them have a category, just don't group ALL single ops (assisted and UN-assisted) in the same category.

Posted by k5er on July 17, 2012

To post a comment, you must be logged in.

If you are not a member, become one now!