Click here for RSS feeds or use the email signup form below to be notified about new radio-sport.net news updates
Donations are accepted. We appreciate the help!
With no public comment from the CQ WW Contest Committee, a controversial new rule dealing with third party contest visits for the 2009 CQ WW DX Contests was quietly changed and dramatically expanded in recent days.
While the move softens penalties originally associated with it, the new rule language markedly shifts the emphasis from specific stations suspected of cheating to all possible high contest scorers.
An email request by radio-sport.net for comment on this year's rules changes to CQ WW Contest Committee Director Bob Cox K3EST went unanswered this past week, raising new questions about why the rule was adopted in the first place and why the late changes were made after the 2009 rules had already been published on the internet.
"I do think the committee needs to communicate with the contest community on this and any other significant rule changes," said PVRC President Ken Claerbout K4ZW, who suggested a "Webinar where they can outline changes for this year and take some questions."
As for the changes made in the new rule on third party in contest visits, here is the text of what was originally printed on the CQ Magazine web site:
"A competitor contacted by the CQ WW Contest Committee prior to the contest must agree to a scheduled visitation by a representative of the CQ WW CC during the contest. Failure of the entrant to respond to our correspondence or to allow an observer full access to the contest QTH will result in the entrant’s call being removed from award eligibility for 5 years."
This past week, that was changed to:
"A competitor who wishes to be judged for a top score in their category must agree to a potential visitation at any time during the contest by an observer appointed by the CQ WW Contest Committee. Failure of the entrant to respond to our correspondence or to allow an observer full access to the contest QTH may result in the competitor being removed from award eligibility for 3 years."
A close examination of the revised rule shows that it switches the focus on third-party-in-contest-reviews from stations and operators who are under possible scrutiny for cheating to everyone in the world aiming at a Top Ten finish.
"CQ WW continues to be paranoid," said David Thompson K4JRB, the former director of the CQ 160 contests. "For the life of me I cannot figure out what they plan to accomplish."
One question that's not clear in the 2009 rules is specficially how or when stations would have to notify the CQ WW Contest Committee about their intention to agree to third party observer visits.
"First, notifying someone before the contest means that an entrant must notify CQ WW that they plan to enter and in what category. Otherwise they will wait until the last second to enter," said Thompson.
"I agree that its time to look closer at high scoring logs but unless CQ WW wants to commit to full time judges I feel this is a waste of time," Thompson added.
Another item that isn't clear is who would be selected for the third party visits, and how those choices would be made.
The new rule was recently agreed to by the CQ WW Contest Committee, and was posted as part of the 2009 rules update that can be accessed from the home page of CQ Magazine.
As expected, the updated rules for the 2009 CQ WW DX Contests, especially the provision that calls for third person visits during the contest to check for cheating, has prompted a lot of discussion and hand wringing about the right choice for contest organizers.
"FB and hope the CQ WW contest guys can apply it RIGHT NOW," read an email from Teddy Jiminez HI3TEJ, who said more needs to be done about people running higher power.
"It is good to get a clear warning to guys are saying running for example in Low power and you know and everybody knows is running over power," said Jiminez, who charged one "Caribbean station" that often claims QRP is really running 100 watts.
Early comments on the CQ-Contest reflector were mixed, with some finding a bit of sarcasm in the discussion of how to stop contest cheating.
"Maybe the next target should be random drug testing and post contest station impounding," said Mike Coslo N3LI, who said the new CQ WW rule already seemed to be in need of a rewrite.
"It will be interesting to see the mechanics of the CQ WW rules," said Julius Fazekas N2WN. "Of course, the next line of questioning will be "who is watching the watchers?"" he wrote on CQ-Contest.
As for an explanation and/or background from the CQ WW Contest Committee, none has yet emerged.
Emails from radio-sport.net to CQ WW CC Director Bob Cox K3EST asking for public comment have gone unanswered over the past month as questions have grown about the committee's decisions on DQ's and the new rules changes.
But during that same time frame, Cox specifically asked fellow committee members not to share information with this website.
"We only have 1 spokesperson: the Director," Cox wrote to the CQ WW CC in an email obtained by radio-sport.net.
That email warning came after a story from radio-sport.net earlier this month about the impending results of the 2008 CQ WW CW Contest, with the news that contesters should expect a high profile DQ as well in that contest, which could determine the winner of the Single Operator High Power category.
Those 2008 CW results are due out in the next few days.
