[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] 2006 Pa QSO Party Plans

To: CQ-Contest Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] 2006 Pa QSO Party Plans
From: Doug Smith W9WI <w9wi@earthlink.net>
Date: 14 Oct 2006 08:48:13 -0500
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
(I was going to make this reply private to Mike, but I think there are
principles in here that may be helpful to anyone who operates in QSO

On Fri, 2006-10-13 at 22:01, Mike Coslo wrote:
> >Do you find claimed scores to be reasonably accurate?
> >  
>     The typical mistakes we find are lack of the EPA/WPA mults. The 
> party uses sections instead of states. Another problem is that blasted 
> 1.5 point CW QSO point value. Depending on where you round up, it can 
> make a difference in the score. Some forget to add the special event 
> station to their score, some get some sections wrong, and some are 
> busted callsigns - sometimes badly busted!

We have similar problems in the Tennessee contest:

- People fail to claim multipliers to which they're entitled.  Many QSO
Parties define counties, states, and DXCC entities as multipliers for
in-state operators.  Often, the way the rules are written, triple mults
are possible.  (for example, a QSO with K4TCG may count as Cheatham Co.,
the state of Tennessee, and the DXCC entity USA.  VE3RAC may count as
both Ontario and Canada, or KH6XXX as both the state and DXCC entity of

- People add the bonus points for the special station K4TCG before
applying the geographic multiplier.  (in our contest bonus points are to
be added *after* the multiplier)  

We do get busted calls and busted multipliers.  I'll give them credit
for a busted multiplier if I can figure out what it was supposed to be. 
We had a problem this year (why only this year I have no idea) where
some software would log a station as Washington State when you tried to
type in Washington County.  Every year, at least one entrant works a DX
station or two and logs their DXCC entity as "DX".  Somehow I doubt
CU2JT is in the Philippines<grin>!

Check-partial can get you in trouble in a hurry!  One year, an entrant
busted K4LTA's call early in the contest.  As the contest proceeded,
every time this entrant started to type Bill's call, their computer
would suggest the busted version - and they'd log it that way. 
Something like five or six QSOs with K4LTA got busted as K4TLA.  And
since Bill was mobile...  they lost five or six multipliers as well.  
> These are approximate figures off the top of my head:
>     Probably 65 percent are spot-on.
>     Of the remaining 35 percent, 15 percent have errors that actually 
> increase their score - those are the happy Ops! Another 17 percent have 
> fairly severe errors that end up altering their score downward. The 
> remaining 3 percent have problems that prevent their being used at all. 

I can't say I've ever received a log that couldn't be used at all,
though I do often have to email an entrant for additional information. 
Most often, they don't provide a mailing address, and/or they don't
indicate their own county.  (making it impossible to cross-check other
logs)  A fair number of logs don't indicate how much power was used;
these are classified as high power.

Since failure to claim earned mults is the most common error in claimed
scores, in most cases people's final scores are greater than claimed but
not enormously so.  Miscalclated bonuses result in more serious
adjustments, and generally in the negative direction.  

I count 13 paper logs out of 83 entries received.
Doug Smith W9WI
Pleasant View (Nashville), TN  EM66

CQ-Contest mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>