CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] FW: Getscores.org Changes/Improvements...

To: "Gerry Hull" <gerry@w1ve.com>,"CQ-Contest@Contesting.COM" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] FW: Getscores.org Changes/Improvements...
From: "Andrew Faber" <andrew.faber@gte.net>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 13:39:47 -0800
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Gerry,
  Interesting debate.  You write:
>>>>>>>
That all said, it is a simple fact that if you are
Getscores.org<http://getscores.org/>as a form of propagation
monitoring, you are simply doing something wrong
(in a tactical sense, not a moral one).   We had radios to monitor
propagation (for the single op) as well as packet spots, etc for the
multi-op.   Getscores is a motivational and informational tool, not a
propagation monitor.   If you use it as such, you will NOT do any better in
the results.
>>>>>>>>
  You may be correct, but the fact remains that if I had been monitoring the 
scoreboard during NAQP CW  and had seen others in my area posting 10m 
scores, I would have been alerted to the 10m opening.  It's certainly true 
that (a) I could have found it by myself, and (b) I should have found it by 
myself.  Nonetheless, I didn't monitor 10 at the right times and did not 
find it by myself.  Thus, using the scoreboard would have improved my score, 
just as monitoring packet spots would have.  Using the scoreboard as a 
propagation monitor would actually be a very sensible thing to do, 
particularly for a one radio single-op.
  73, andy, ae6y 


_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

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