Yuri,
Have you looked at how you penalty-rate compares with other
stations? As hard as it may be to swallow, Yuri, this penalty-rate
may be "par for the course" or perhaps even above average,
especially when you consider that this is 40 meter SSB where
multiple stations can be listening on the same split QRG and
foreign BC is wall-to-wall on the European side.
If you feel so strongly about this issue and are so sure about
your inerrancy, I suggest you start recording the contests,
and then if you find cases where you clearly have been
unfairly penalized, you can make the recordings public so
we can all judge for ourselves. Otherwise, we are all left
to wonder if this disappearing QSO conspiracy is a real
phenomenon or just the product of someones over-inflated
sense of their own infallability :):)
73 de Mike, W4EF................................
.
----- Original Message -----
From: <K3BU@aol.com>
To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2005 5:49 PM
Subject: [CQ-Contest] K3BU SSB UBN
> Just to add a little more fueal into the fire:-)
>
> Those are the -N in CQ WW SSB on 40m by K3BU
>
> 35 -N OM7M(3204)
> 107 -N ED3SSB(1184)
> 163 -N CE3BFZ(1730)
> 198 -N RK0AXX(2616)
> 233 -N T94FC(395)
> 253 -N SZ1A(2779)
> 255 -N SA5W(615)
> 262 -N SN1D(2067)
>
> Why am I not in their logs? They are all no slouch stations judging by
> their
> high numbers, I know I worked them (or someone signing their calls) 8
> weird
> QSOs times four = 32 QSOs penalized me for no errors of mine. What lesson
> do I
> learn? 3 QSO penalty is forcing me to learn, but what?
>
> I know I fought hard to work them on 40m split. They said my call, we
> exchanged reports. No guessing. Life goes on :-)
>
> 73 Yuri, K3BU
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|