I remember logging some of them and my check is "67". I think there needs to be some kind of penalty for any busted information. This provides incentive to either get it right, or not put it in log.
If you have an SWR meter, they can be used just as well. TR Log even has a start up routine that allows you to enter two low impedance frequencies and it will tell you the electrical length of your
One of the best things that helps the activity in the NCJ Sprints (the original Sprint) is the team competition. This would be a good step to increase participation. This would be hard with 3 kids.
Hmmm - does this mean only one transmitter at a time? If my station is configure so I have a different radio for each band - can I not enter this contest? What if only one of them is turned on at a
Nope. It's a jungle out there - if you are getting results and are happy with the situation, then you don't have to do anything. With respect to 500 versus 250, I think the shape of the filter is mu
Well - I figured my comments would generate some responses. Glad to see a discussion about this. What if you are in the position of not being able to find a clear place on the band? I often have a p
I think "sugar victor" would be the best one to use. Sacramento Valley has a C in it. If (and this is a big IF) we ever got to the point of removing QSOs from both logs - being in Sacramento Valley,
Yup. This is the corrective action I am taking after having enough stupid mistakes to keep me from moving up a position in the CW results. SF won't be logged, and I need to enter either SFL or SFO.
When it appears excessive. It is MUCH different between CW and SSB. On CW, there were a couple of logs (mine included) that had a very pronounced number of unique calls. The winning log on CW ended
Interesting discussion about 67 versus 72. Here is more data: The QSO numbers where the wrong check was copied are: 10, 148, 197, 244, 540, 617, 634, 686, 698, 830 and 887. There were no other errors
The CW SS Results are on the member's only section of the ARRL web site as of this afternoon. 73 Tree N6TR -- CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/ Administrative requests: cq-con
I missed Rich's original comments - thanks for drawing them out Bob. This is probably a correct statement. There should be some penalty to discourage guessing. What I mean is that you should lose so
In this part of the country - I am only competetive in a DX contest during the summer months. The IARU and WPX tests are a lot of fun. Let's not make all of the contests the same! 73 Tree N6TR/7 in
I agree that the difference between these two cases is minimal and the penalty for both should probably be the same. I have had discussions with some of the ARRL people, and I believe they are consi
My experience with this feature is that there are two problems with it: 1. The data changes more from year to year than you error rate. 2. It distracts you too much from listening to what is being s
Humans are very much involved in the "final" say with respect to DQing an entry. As far as I know, there are no DQs in the SS. One or two stations had some interesting things in their log that were
etc. Sender: owner-cq-contest@contesting.com Precedence: bulk X-List-Info: http://www.contesting.com/cq-contest-faq.html X-Sponsor: W4AN, KM3T, N5KO & AD1C Well - truth be known, there are already ma
Right - and this is the point I was trying to make. Conditions change during a contest and what made sense an hour ago may no longer make sense. They way things will be changed involve some QRM and
For most contests - if someone busts your call - there is no impact to your score. There are two or three contests that will also remove the QSO from your log. I don't believe there are any penaltie
Interesting... Typically - here on the west coast, we tend to start contests on the highest frequency band possible. I guess my "vote" would be to start on 10 and work down (unless 10 isn't open). H