[Top] [All Lists]

[CQ-Contest] FWD: re: Casual contesters...one case

Subject: [CQ-Contest] FWD: re: Casual contesters...one case
From: k1ir@designet.com (Jim Idelson)
Date: Tue Mar 20 14:47:16 2001
Thanks, Al. Interesting story. I'll bet the submissions would rise
substantially if there were some small incentive . . . I'd support it!


---------- Forwarded Message ----------

FROM:   AD6E@aol.com
TO:     cq-contest@contesting.com
DATE:   Tue, 20 Mar 2001 14:38:09 EST

RE:     re: Casual contesters...one case

Hi Jim,

As one statistic point, I made a good faith attempt to determine the true
participation level of the last California QSO Party. Out of 463 logs
received (real entries), the logs contained over 10,000 uniqe call signs
(including some busted calls), and 5,482 non-unique call signs (as many
busted calls as I could find removed).

Thus, the "casual" op (anyone who makes QSOs but doesn't submit a log)
represents about 95% of all people who participated in the contest. I'd love
to find a lure to get more of these guys 'n gals to send in their logs. A
raffle might be a good incentive. Contest results and other stuff is on line
at http://www.CQP.ORG (or will be when contesting.com gets fully back on

The "casual" op breakdown is like this:

1 QSO ...  >4,000
2 QSOs ...  1,221
3 QSOs ...    677
4 QSOs ...    500
5 QSOs ...    331
6 QSOs ...    263
7 QSOs ...    223
8 QSOs ...    117
9 QSOs ...    127
10 Qs ......    121

2 - 10 Qs...   3,646
11 - 20 Qs...    739
21 - 50 Qs...    521
51 - 100 Qs..   254
100 - 200 Qs ..  90
200 - 500 Qs .. 116
 > 500 Qs ...     103

Different events may get different distributions, but I thought this was an
interesting breakdown. Obviously we owe these "casual" ops a lot of thanks
for making it fun for the remaining 5% of us who are serious enough to
actually send in our logs.

BTW, if you were in that 5% who actually sent in your log for this past CQP,
the log checking report files are available. Just send me a note and I'll
email it back to you. Results are also available, and will be posted at
http://www.cqp.org when the server lets us do that. Many thanks to W4AN and
the group at contesting.com for giving us the space. I'm sure they'll have
the new equipment & software up and running soon.

73, Al  AD6E

In a message dated 3/19/2001 20:48:00 Pacific Standard Time,
owner-cq-contest-digest@contesting.com writes:

  From: Jim Idelson <k1ir@designet.com>
  Subject: [CQ-Contest] re: Casual contesters...


  Really interesting analysis. Now, take it off on a tangent. What is the
  average percentage of calls in each year's log that shows up in the
published results?
  Certainly, you don't make it out of the "casual" category if you don't
  submit a score. How could increases in score submissions be achieved? How
about a prize drawing for anyone who submits a log with one or more legal
qso's? Getting
  people to submit scores doesn't take them out of the "casual" category, but
  they know they're submitting a score for the raffle, is it possible that they
  might try for a few more qso's? And, what would be bad about attracting a
  whole bunch more ops for a few qso's each? That would make it more
  adding more verifiable unique callsigns. As I think about it, score
  submissions might increase if every entrant were guaranteed to receive a
copy of the results. If I'm a casual contester and I don't subscribe to CQ,
  particularly as a DX station, I might not send in my score because I'll
never even see the results. Maybe there's potential for an increase in
submissions if sponsors
  could deliver pdf or printed results to every entrant.

  Ready! Fire! Aim!


  Jim K1IR

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

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [CQ-Contest] FWD: re: Casual contesters...one case, Jim Idelson <=