[PVRCNC] Re: [PVRC] Packet and SS, some stats. Read #s and weep.

[alsopb]

Guy,

Here are some remarks of a statistical nature on your analysis.

1) Why was median rather than mean used for score.  Statistical tests
of hypothesis can't be done on medians but they can be done on means.
2) What was the standard deviation of the distributions?  Is is quite
possible that deviations are so great that one can't show anything
but:
    "The hypothesis that SOHP scores are the same as U scores is not
contradicted by the data"   This conclusion in statistical mumbo jumbo
terms is contrary to yours.
3) Where is the control group?  Without a control group of people of
the same skills to compare to, conclusions are generally invalid.  You
have assumed that either the U or the SOHP group constitutes a control
group with equal skills.  I question that.

Now let's assume that the truth is that assisted isn't a benefit.  How
do we get the ARRL and others to fess up and realize that it is the
operator, not what technology he uses, that determines the outcome. 
SOA categories should be deleted and entered as SO.  Right now
assisted operation puts one in the multi class in some ARRL contests.

Where is your analysis for SO2R?

73 de Brian/K3KO



"Guy Olinger, K2AV" wrote:
> 
> I hate to disagree with all the stuff about running "U" to run up our
> SS scores. The numbers tell a different and completely obvious (IMHO)
> story.
> 
> Following gleaned from Dink's latest offering of 3830 listserve SS
> claimed scores.
> 
> An infrequently used term: Median, point where as many scores are
> above as below, Gives a more meaningful concept of center when there
> are very large or very small scores that can skew an average
> (arithmetic mean).
> 
> Examining the characteristics of the "top half" of scores may expose
> trends among the most serious and/or proficient operators
> 
> Median score
>   SOHP 168.3k
>   "U"  141.0k
> 
> Average number of sections for stations above median score for class:
>   SOHP 79.68
>   "U"  80.00
> 
> Average number of hours operation for stations above median score for
> class:
>   SOHP 23.90
>   "U"  22.60
> 
> Conclusions:
> 
> Top Half scores are almost entirely full time efforts, with non-packet
> stations almost a perfect 24 hours.
> 
> As could be expected, top half packet scores are all clean sweeps, but
> that is a microscopic advantage over an average of 79.68 among the
> SOHP. No top half SOHP missed more than one section, and MOST were
> clean sweeps.
> 
> The variation in median score between the groups is fairly constant
> over the ENTIRE RANGE of scores. This indicates that on whole, even
> accounting for the difference in operating time, operating "U" is a
> DISADVANTAGE.
> 
> There are a scattering of stations in "U" that bucked that trend. They
> are, to the man, all operators that have WON contests, divisions,
> zones, etc, before.
> 
> This leads me to suspect that operating "U" has some difficult aspects
> that take top rank skills to subdue. One obvious disadvantage of
> packet sniping is that following spots there is always a pileup when
> you get there.
> 
> The maxim still holds: Run an amp, call CQ, don't worry about
> sections, and put in the hours.
> 
> This year I tuned up on a clear spot on 10 above the crowd, and when I
> lifted the key I was called by the only station I worked in VI. He was
> 40 over S9, by far the loudest signal I heard the entire contest. SS
> has a lot of serendipity to it.
> 
> An hour later I heard him again and he was only S5, and subject of a
> pileup. Probably couldn't have worked him. If I follow a packet spot
> and find him at the S5 level, I have to have the sense to keep on
> going and keep up my rate.
> 
> 73, Guy.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PVRC mailing list
> PVRC@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/pvrc