I added N4ZR's Reverse Beacon Network (RBN) statistics to the 2010 IARU
Excel workbook.
Crunch away!
Here's the link to version 1.0.4: http://tinyurl.com/267ordj
73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Chudek - K0RC" <k0rc@citlink.net>
To: "CQ Contest" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2010 10:18 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Spots and Success in the WRTC - a little data
fordiscussion
My first thought on this was that those stations with low spot numbers were
Running more than they were CQing.
As far as I know, the RBN spots any station it hears sending two CQs and a
callsign. If they only sent one CQ and a callsign, I don't think this would
satisfy the RBN spot filter. (Pete, correct me if this isn't true).
73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve London" <n2icarrl@gmail.com>
To: "CQ Contest" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2010 8:13 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Spots and Success in the WRTC - a little data for
discussion
>A question that I have is...what were R32K, R31X, R36O, R34D, R37P, R39A
>and
> R39R doing differently that caused them to be infrequently picked up by a
> skimmer ?
>
> On the suggestion of my teammate, N6TV, our CQ was "TEST R39M R39M". All
> characters were sent at the same speed - usually at 36 or 38 WPM. That
> seems to
> have resulted in the 6th highest skimmer capture rate.
>
> 73,
> Steve, N2IC
>
> Pete Smith wrote:
>> The following table lists the contestants in WRTC by finish order and
>> callsign, and then shows the number of spots recorded in the Reverse
>> Beacon Network database. Reverse beacons don't cheerlead or select
>> which stations to spot. You can draw your own conclusions. Perhaps
>> there is a statistician among us who can derive further enlightenment by
>> analyzing these numbers, together with others released by the organizers.
>>
>> Call Place Spots
>> R32F 1 182
>> R33A 2 109
>> R33M 3 316
>> R39D 4 172
>> R34P 5 156
>> R32K 6 0
>> R32R 7 106
>> R31X 8 21
>> R37M 9 189
>> R36C 10 166
>> R33L 11 132
>> R38F 12 232
>> R33G 13 163
>> R31U 14 62
>> R34O 15 122
>> R36Y 16 59
>> R34W 17 197
>> R39M 18 222
>> R32C 19 115
>> R37L 20 139
>> R37Q 21 247
>> R34C 22 184
>> R36O 23 17
>> R38O 24 116
>> R31A 25 302
>> R36F 26 41
>> R38K 27 187
>> R38X 28 79
>> R31D 29 111
>> R34D 30 14
>> R32Z 31 252
>> R32O 32 111
>> R37A 33 184
>> R32W 34 142
>> R31N 35 140
>> R36Z 36 100
>> R38N 37 50
>> R36K 38 91
>> R38W 39 79
>> R37P 40 10
>> R39A 41 25
>> R37U 42 191
>> R34X 43 76
>> R39R 44 12
>> R34Z 45 133
>> R33U 46 96
>> R36W 47 152
>> R33Q 48 85
>>
>>
>> When I first saw this, I questioned how it was possible that a station
>> could finish sixth and yet not be spotted even once, but the scientist
>> on our team tells me it is not only possible, but statistically likely.
>> In any case, that's what the database says.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|