CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Additional Penalty

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Additional Penalty
From: Joe <nss@mwt.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2016 09:23:31 -0500
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
I agree 100%
I always liked the penalty for not copying it correctly. I am really in the minority here too, for the level of penalty. I'd love to see it be make a bad entry,, the Q before and after are removed. Zero points their in the log so the 2 contacts for the other guys are still good. But for you no matter if they are new mults or whatever value of the 2 Q's you get zero points for them and no mult the Q's are gone as if never happened.

And take it further, There are now days with all the computer logging programs, there are absolutely no excuses for dupes. Unless again a bad log entry was made so it doesn't look like a dupe. I'd make dupes the same way as above.

But I'm mean.  But hey a rule is a rule. copy it right and no dupes. hello?

Joe WB9SBD
Sig
The Original Rolling Ball Clock
Idle Tyme
Idle-Tyme.com
http://www.idle-tyme.com
On 4/13/2016 8:37 AM, Paul O'Kane wrote:
On 13/04/2016 04:11, Radio K0HB wrote:

<snip>

Without overly belaboring the obvious, your success as a contester is
directly proportional how fast and accurately you can fill your log with
"good" exchanges. Lower accuracy = lower score.

So what useful purpose is served by the retribution imposed in the practice
of reducing the score further with an "additional penalty"?

"Additional penalties", as K0HB describes them, appear to be
applied more often to bust callsigns, rather than exchanges,
in a few contests - including CQWW.

One argument in favour of them is that, as in multiple choice
tests, they remove any reward for guessing - perhaps from a
SCP list, or from a bust spot where you did not wait to hear
the other station's callsign.

However, since such penalties apply equally to all entrants,
there can be no cause for complaint - especially as contest
sponsors are free to set their own scoring rules.

It's probably best to think of these rules as an incentive
for accurate logging.

73,
Paul EI5DI








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




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

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