CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

[CQ-Contest] ARRL & Dupes

Subject: [CQ-Contest] ARRL & Dupes
From: DXIS@wxs.nl (Alex C.J. van Eijk)
Date: Mon Mar 9 11:26:53 1998
Hi to all....

Just wrapping up from the ARRL SSB contest (20 single band) which was
again a fun thing to do, although it has been a constant battle for
frequency space, akin to what ON4UN described for 80m. I had the
impression certain stations deliberately pushed Mic and Proc gain to be
wider and all that. At one point I was informed I was a bit too wide
which was correct as I had inadvertently given the Mic gain a swing
instead of the RF Pwr knob around it and so I corrected that problem.
However, having a clean signal means others can work very close to you!
Anyway, that is not the topic of this message.

Someone really has to explain to me now, why the ARRL contest has such a
high dupe rate and if anyone else (from the DX-end) is having a similar
experience. Here is some data:
 
Call          Entry     Mode   QSOs     Dupes      Percentage
D25L    1997  40m/HP    CW      987      60          6.08
PA3DZN  1998  AB/HP     CW     2597      80          3.08
PA3DZN  1998  20m/HP    SSB    2025      94          4.64

I do not have more data, but I wonder if this high dupe percentage is a
structural and recurring issue which seems to be inherent to the ARRL DX
contests. (Other world wide contests show a much lower dupe rate).

Looking at the statistics, and assuming a whole lot, the working of
dupes over the contest period equals by approximation to one hour of
"running" stations; on average I work between 80 - 100 stations per hour
(it is not a CQWW contest, that is obvious). Thus, working over 80 dupes
translates to working one hour of dupes, which is a plain waste of time
of course.

73, Alex PA3DZN
-- 
Alex C.J. van Eijk
Email: DXIS@wxs.nl




--
CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [CQ-Contest] ARRL & Dupes, Alex C.J. van Eijk <=