I am still trying to completely understand the UBM reports and I find them confusing for some circumstances. From what I have figured out so far makes me believe that I would only agree to share my U
No contest organizers should ever adopt a rule that puts stations in a position where they MUST make zero point QSOs to remain competitive. The WPX requires you to work mults in your same country for
If anyone wants more information about what Jim is alluding to, go to your local library to check out and read "And The Sea Will Tell" by Vincent Bugliosi. I think the events that happened on the isl
point That is a terrific rule change that eliminates the situation of QSOs where one station gets absolutely zero score improvement from the exchange and doesn't want to bother with working the other
discouraging not You can work them! You just don't get points for them! It's no big deal! After all, Field Day is an operating activity and the additional QSOs are a good training medium for budding
discouraging not You can work them! You just don't get points for them! It's no big deal! After all, Field Day is an operating activity and the additional QSOs are a good training medium for budding
one you Doug I have to question what you say because I don't believe you have experience using the many different contest programs for logging a contest. Some of these contest programs make it almost
I don't know how much time is taken to cross-check each log entry to the ARRL, but apparently it takes too much time to do each and every log. There may always be the situation where one entrant will
I agree. The CQWW has dug themselves into a hole over this. The situation has been created by a combination of two things. First it is possible for a QSO to occur in CQWW where one station gets point
"correcting," so I I took the time to read Doug's comments twice. I think his comments are very noble and his vision of logging ethics is certainly one I would not mind living by. But there are confl
one you Doug I have to question what you say because I don't believe you have experience using the many different contest programs for logging a contest. Some of these contest programs make it almost
I don't know how much time is taken to cross-check each log entry to the ARRL, but apparently it takes too much time to do each and every log. There may always be the situation where one entrant will
I agree. The CQWW has dug themselves into a hole over this. The situation has been created by a combination of two things. First it is possible for a QSO to occur in CQWW where one station gets point
"correcting," so I I took the time to read Doug's comments twice. I think his comments are very noble and his vision of logging ethics is certainly one I would not mind living by. But there are confl
I agree. This situation is becoming a serious problem. The CQWW folks need to do one of two courses of action. Either: 1. Discourage zero point QSOs by disallowing multiplier credit for any QSOs that
I have used K5NA and then KU2Q in successive years of the WPX CW while doing a single-band 10M effort. With conditions seeming to be identical, the use of KU2Q gave me more QSOs and many more multip
I reported this once before about 3 years ago, but it is similar to some of the other humorous moments being reported. This actually hapened to me while I was still living and contesting from New Yor
I reported this once before about 3 years ago, but it is similar to some of the other humorous moments being reported. This actually hapened to me while I was still living and contesting from New Yor
I reported this once before about 3 years ago, but it is similar to some of the other humorous moments being reported. This actually hapened to me while I was still living and contesting from New Yor
In the 1970s, as K5PFL, I set up for three radio contesting. The stations were Collins KWM2/75S3B ==> Henry 2K4 Drake B-line ==> SB220 Drake C-line ==> Henry 2K4 (a second one) It took two desks and