I wrote:
If the ARRL 28 Mc is anything to go by, I'm a total wank of an op - even
stooping so low as to log heaps of contacts that never took place (20% of
my total log is bogus, based on the analysis).
Correction:
Make that 10% of my log being rubbish, of which half is for claiming Qs that
evidently didn't take place. The other half is because I can't count dots
or dashes, which isn't a surprise considering how bad my math evidently is!
Meanwhile, as long as logging accuracy is considered a two-way deal, we'll
get burned for things beyond our control, which will make nobody happy as
K2AV pointed out. Since Q points are in multiples of two in the ARRL 28 Mc
contest, perhaps the seemingly strict application of log checking would be
more palatable if some things are considered one-way.
Two-way = two times one-way. Didn't SS allow half credit before the exchange
was shortened to just the preamble of a message? Anyone remember the
justification for that? Could it be that it wasn't considered fair to one
op if the other fumbled? While today I can contribute to a fumble & deserve
to take a hit for that, there are many ways that the other op can blow it &
there's not a thing I can do about it - short of working everybody twice &
even that doesn't work (two of my NILs were from the same guy who called me
during my run).
73, VR2BrettGraham
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|