All's Fair?

[W3WN]

Is it better to "lose", that is come in 2nd or 3rd or 4th place, having done your very level best... or is it better to "win" (come in first) regardless of what you did to get there?

I would think that the answer to that is a no-brainer. Right now, I'm not so sure.

The context of this... well, there's a discussion ongoing on the DX CHAT reflector that I adminsister for the NJDXA regarding certain operating practices. One specifically mentioned was a few stations that, during last weekend's ARRL DX CW contest, would send an automated, continual CQ... and never answer anyone. In fact, even if you zero beat them, and matched their keyer speed, you'd get maybe one or two characters of your call out before the CQ would start again. [Yes, maybe they didn't hear you, but that's not the issue]

I have since received a PM from a list member who insists that "all's fair in love-n-war" and then berates me for believing in proper operating technique. He also specifically tells me "if u want to win...so...do what u can".

I know it's a prevalent attitude, especially amongst the so-called contest elite. And maybe I'm old fashioned. Personally, I have to look at myself in the mirror and sleep at night; winning by cheating, or by skirting the rules, or by deliberately doing something to harm another's chances... no.

But that's me.

What would YOU do?

And if you're not a contester, as many of you aren't... then as a DX'er, or county hunter, or just in general operating practices.

Does anything go?

[KJ3N]

First the contest reflector, now a dx reflector. I'm noticing a pattern here.....

[W3WN]

First the contest reflector, now a dx reflector. I'm noticing a pattern here.....

What, you think I spend all my radio time online?

[KJ3N]

What, you think I spend all my radio time online?

No, but I find it interesting that you seem to be at odds with 2 different reflector groups. ;)

That's the pattern I'm referring to.....

[N8YX]

No, but I find it interesting that you seem to be at odds with 2 different reflector groups. ;)

That's the pattern I'm referring to.....

They may share the same membership, though. That being the case, the animosity would pretty much be a given.

[W3WN]

No, but I find it interesting that you seem to be at odds with 2 different reflector groups. ;)

That's the pattern I'm referring to.....

Well, I try to stick up for my principles. And if I'm wrong, I admit it.

I don't think I'm at odds, overall, with the DX groups. Now the CQ Contest group, well, there you have a point. I know I'm definitely in the minority. But that reflector is administered by some of the same people who sit on the contest committees and make (and enforce) the rules. Suffice to say, there is definitely a bias there. But that's another story for another day.

[KB3LIX]

I participate in most major contests, and always submit a log no matter
how many or few Q's. I don't buy the anything goes thinking.
I do what I can to make my score. IF I do well, good, If I do poorly
thats OK too.

Usually, I am trying to beat my score in the same contest from last year.
A guy like me, with my limited facilities, is NEVER gonna "kick butt"
But I can give it an honest try.

[N8YX]

I would DQ the station from the specific contest and if the behavior continued, bar him or her from subsequent participation in any others.

[N2CHX]

Doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose? I mean, what fun is contesting if you have a computer doing all the work for you? I don't contest, just thinking out loud.

[W3WN]

Doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose? I mean, what fun is contesting if you have a computer doing all the work for you? I don't contest, just thinking out loud.

The only apparant purpose for an automated transmission is to prevent someone else from using the frequency. Reserving it for yourself, in short. I don't think that's much fun either.