[Moon] Correction: mixed class breakdown

[jimmyv at hol.gr]

Hi Joe

Correction: I just saw that ARRL EME Competition 2008 results display  
the breakdown between Analog and Digital QSOs for the Mixed class. As  
in previous years.
That strengthens even further my previous argument below. If one looks  
for example at the most popular Single Op. Assisted Mixed class on 2m,  
he will see that the percentage of analog to digital QSOs is even less  
than 5%-95%. No wonder why ''internet and mode easy'' to get more  
points, is popular. Also, looking closely i observed a lot of zero  
QSOs in analog and all being in Digital, but still entries appearing  
in the Mixed class. Another mystery.
http://www.arrl.org/contests/results/2008/EME/errants.html

73
Jimmy SV1BTR

Quoting jimmyv at hol.gr:

> Hi Joe
>
> Once more you choose to intepret my words in a way that would suit you
> and ARRL for obvious miscommunication reasons. As such, your
> deliberate count is wrong. I wrote the word entries, as anyone can
> clearly see in my yesterday's public post (pasted below yours). You
> choose to not interpet the word entry as stations per band, which
> complies to contest rules. This is clearly wrong, as a station can for
> example enter on 2m & 70cm, this makes 2 separate entries being
> submitted. Sorry but Contest rules must be respected. And to compare
> apples with apples according to rules eligible for each Contest.
>
> Thus, DUBUS EU EME WW 2008 Contest
> http://www.marsport.org.uk/dubus/EMECont2008result.pdf  and
> http://www.marsport.org.uk/dubus/EMECont2008digires.pdf has:
> 141 entries in CW in total per band, and 35 multi-band entries.
> Digital has 15 entries indeed. (typing errors as i had written 144 &
> 14 yesterday).
>
> If one counts ARRL 2008 EME Competition logs submitted,  - even
> without anyone checking logs vs loggers !!! - he will find the total
> number to be 140.
> http://www.arrl.org/contests/results/2008/EME/errants.html
> For ARRL I count all the entries in all winning categories as per
> rules also (if i chose to do that for DUBUS, where i count only
> entries per band, it would become 141+35+15=191)
>
> This clearly proves:
> a. that an EME Contest devoted to RADIO (DUBUS EU EME WW), with logs
> being thoroughly checked, and not use of Internet (ARRL for the
> Assisted class) is more popular and preferred.
> b. that EME Contests separated by mode are more successful
>
> Your comment on Mixed class (ARRL) being the most popular does not
> surprise me at all. Why? Because ARRL chooses not to display the
> breakdown of QSOs between CW and Digital. Why don't you take a look in
> 2006+2007 results where one clearly sees that for the Mixed entries,
> the proportion of Digital to CW is roughly speaking 90%-10%. Or even
> 95%-5%. On the band that mixed entries enjoy the absolute highest
> number (2m).
> Therefore, the answer to your remark that Mixed class has been most
> popular is because it is so easy to work 90% in digital and 10% in cw
> and one claim he works both modes being a ''heavyweight'' station.
> Everything for the ''fame''. Even more, an assisted ''heavyweight''
> one.....my goodness, how difficult that is!
>
> Thank you for missing me in 2008 ARRL EME Competition and wishing me
> to come back to 2009 one. I have also missed working you and all old
> and new friends. Being qrv on EME Contests for 14 years and choosing
> to not participate at ARRL 2008 has not been an easy decision to take.
> However, as you well know i did not participate at all due to the
> detrimental, to Radio, Contest rules that have gone way too far.
> Certainly if ARRL 2009 rules separate entirely Contest by mode (as
> DUBUS and ARI do), regardless if Digital section has its own easier
> rules, i will be happy to come back and be qrv in the CW section. If
> not, i look forward to work you in DUBUS EU WW EME Contest 2010 (since
> i will miss the 2009 one due to qrl abroad).
>
> 73
> Jimmy SV1BTR
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Joe Taylor" <joe at Princeton.EDU>
> To: <jimmyv at hol.gr>; "Moon" <moon at moonbounce.info>
> Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 4:53 PM
> Subject: Re: Contests & numbers
>
>
>> Hi Jimmy,
>>
>> SV1BTR wrote:
>>> It is with great interest that what i anticipated has been also    
>>> proven by numbers.
>>
>> When you want to have something proven by numbers, it's a good idea  
>>   to get the numbers right.
>>
>> The REF/DUBUS contest results show CW entries from 83 stations,   
>> (not  144 as you claim), and digital entries from 15 stations (not   
>> 14).   Six of the stations submitting a digital entry also entered   
>> the CW  segment.  The REF/DUBUS results show entries from 92   
>> stations in all.
>>
>> There are, or course, a number of multi-band entries with callsigns  
>>   listed more than once.  If the same thing were done with entries   
>> in  the ARRL contest, it would have close to 200 "entries".
>>
>> Interestingly, "Mixed" was by far the the most popular mode   
>> category  in the ARRL contest:
>>
>> Mixed:     62
>> Analog:    44
>> Digital:   25
>>
>> (There were also 9 entries using the microwave bands only, where no  
>>   mode distinctions are made.)
>>
>> I think the ARRL and DUBUS contests were both very enjoyable for    
>> everyone who participated.
>>
>> We missed you in the ARRL contest, and I hope you'll be back next    
>> year.  Perhaps the rules will be more to your liking by then.  I    
>> will look forward to working you on your favorite mode.
>> -- 73, Joe, K1JT