In every contest the computer is running the show, because we do
computerized logging, super check partial etc.
In this case we have over dependence on auto sequence, which makes things
more complicated rather than easier.
Ria
N2RJ
On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 9:31 PM Edward Sawyer <EdwardS@sbelectronics.com>
wrote:
> Isn't the basic problem that the computer is running the show? On both
> ends. And the operator really is helpless to change that?
>
> It's a very basic statement about what is really happening with this mode.
>
> 73
>
> Ed N1UR
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces+edwards=
> sbelectronics.com@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Tim Shoppa
> Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 9:13 AM
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] World Wide Digi DX Contest Results.
>
> K4SBZ writes:
> > In any case, it is
> > the operator who makes the decision not to log the QSO. No QSOs are
> > automatically not logged. And the next action requires the operator to
> > manually select another callsign to call or send CQ. There is no chaining
> > of contacts.
> > The problem is that the operators have become so accustomed to the prompt
> > to log a QSO when 73 is sent that they think it is a requirement.
>
> I originally had some thoughts like you. Folks unfamiliar with logging
> details or imagining a requirement for a 73 might have been the source of
> most of the NIL's.
>
> Then I asked Ed to send me my LCR and I looked it over. Most of the NIL's
> given by me or given to me, were with other well-known multi-mode
> contesters, not with newbies. So there goes my theory that it was newbies
> racking up the NIL's.
>
> It just IS HARDER to figure out whether a QSO was complete or not on
> FT4/FT8. All the clues that even a beginning contester learns quickly, as
> to whether the QSO is complete, or not complete, are simply lacking in
> FT4/FT8. We make our best guess based on what the computer decodes or does
> not decode, maybe try an extra cycle or two to see if we can tease out the
> confirmation we are looking for, decide whether to log it or not, and
> compared to other modes, that guess is several times more fallible.
>
> And it wasn't just newbies. Even for very experienced multi mode
> contesters, that guess is several times more fallible in FT4/FT8 than for
> other modes.
>
> Adding extra confirmation steps on top of the existing confirmation steps?
> That'd just make the NIL rate worse because those are more opportunities
> for things to get lost in the noise and QRM!
>
> There are several contests out there (NAQP comes to mind but I'm sure there
> are others) where NIL's do not result in any penalty, just the loss of
> credit for that Q. I think the WW Digi organizers were wise to chose this
> approach in scoring.
>
> Tim N3QE
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|