Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:f5vhj@orange.fr: 69 ]

Total 69 documents matching your query.

21. Re: [CQ-Contest] IARU R1 proposals (score: 1)
Author: "Albert Crespo" <f5vhj@orange.fr>
Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2009 04:47:53 -0800
I have been sworn by these lids for operating on 14302 KHz. They deserve nothing but contempt. -- From: "Shore Marine" <shore1@xplornet.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 4:31 PM To: "Richard Di
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-12/msg00040.html (13,603 bytes)

22. Re: [CQ-Contest] Is it time to reevaluate CQWW Scoring Rules? (score: 1)
Author: "Albert Crespo" <f5vhj@orange.fr>
Date: Sat, 05 Dec 2009 09:06:59 -0800
At least 95% of EF8DM's QSOs were worth 3 points, compared to V47NT in which perhaps 40 %of his QSOs were with NA and only worth two points. V47NT (N2NT) decided to operate from a location he does no
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-12/msg00139.html (10,754 bytes)

23. Re: [CQ-Contest] Is it time to reevaluate CQWW Scoring Rules? (score: 1)
Author: "Albert Crespo" <f5vhj@orange.fr>
Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2009 16:01:02 -0800
Dave, If CQWW decided to create a new contest based upon distance, would the next step be to handicap those who are in a location that has better propagation then others ( P4 verus OH)? Does this bec
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-12/msg00250.html (35,315 bytes)

24. Re: [CQ-Contest] Is it time to reevaluate CQWW Scoring Rules? (score: 1)
Author: "Albert Crespo" <f5vhj@orange.fr>
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2009 08:07:49 -0800
After reading all the comments, especially the one by HA5PP, I finally got it that this has been nothing but a joke. If the new scoring requirement is based on distance between contacts , what happen
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-12/msg00339.html (12,325 bytes)

25. [CQ-Contest] USA stations in ARRL DX (score: 1)
Author: "Albert Crespo" <f5vhj@orange.fr>
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 05:44:25 -0800
Working USA lids just encourages them to continue polluting other stations logs who they then call. Nothing discourages bad operating then nobody every coming back to your call. Just ignore- easy, po
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-02/msg00326.html (6,729 bytes)

26. [CQ-Contest] NOT IN LOG (score: 1)
Author: "Albert Crespo" <f5vhj@orange.fr>
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2010 08:55:07 -0800
In 2008 as 6W1RY in CQWW Phone I was penalized and lost a multiple = because I was not in the log of the infamous D4C operation that was = later disqualified. They got disqualified, but I was penaliz
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-06/msg00206.html (8,792 bytes)

27. Re: [CQ-Contest] Cheating (score: 1)
Author: "Albert Crespo" <f5vhj@orange.fr>
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 13:28:25 -0800
Feeding So to one nationality by spotting is not a reflection upon the operators of WRTC and they should not be penalized. When you hear a friend on during a contest and you want to help him by spott
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-07/msg00174.html (12,965 bytes)

28. [CQ-Contest] CQWW OPEN Logs (score: 1)
Author: "Albert Crespo" <f5vhj@orange.fr>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:11:21 -0800
?What is the present URL for CQWW to examine open logs? _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-10/msg00126.html (7,091 bytes)

29. Re: [CQ-Contest] Frustration this weekend..... (score: 1)
Author: "Albert Crespo" <f5vhj@orange.fr>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 13:21:37 -0800
How do you have 300 QSO rate per hour? Just do not ID. If you do, the rate goes down. Must be why I have such lousy rate (6W1RY, TO5A,NH7A). If Mr. Bozo wants to send his call every three minutes bec
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-11/msg00540.html (10,897 bytes)

30. Re: [CQ-Contest] Mult passing: is it okay to use? (score: 1)
Author: "Albert Crespo" <f5vhj@orange.fr>
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 05:20:41 -0800
Most hams are gracious enough to try and lend a helping hand and give out multipliers , if possible. I have asked stations in the past to QSY and make up to four band changes. More then 90% of them t
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-01/msg00292.html (12,163 bytes)

31. [CQ-Contest] "Real Time Scoring" (score: 1)
Author: "Albert Crespo" <f5vhj@orange.fr>
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 13:46:34 -0800
A sponsor can make up the rules for a contest. I am not forced to participate. Any contest that mandates I have to be hooked up to the Internet to play Amateur Radio, well, I will go do something con
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-02/msg00118.html (12,576 bytes)

32. [CQ-Contest] QRO (score: 1)
Author: "Albert Crespo" <f5vhj@orange.fr>
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 17:14:48 -0800
Whenever I hear EF8M, I make it a point not to work him. That is his reward for QRO. That solves my issue with him. Boycott cheaters. The committee of CQWW cannot on itās own catch QRO violators. In
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-10/msg00160.html (10,391 bytes)

33. Re: [CQ-Contest] CW Exchange (score: 1)
Author: "Albert Crespo" <f5vhj@orange.fr>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 05:50:32 -0800
I want to make sure I am in the log correctly and only if I am in doubt, I send my call. With the penalty rate of losing three QSOs for a busted call, if the other station does not have your call cor
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-11/msg00497.html (11,472 bytes)

34. [CQ-Contest] T2V (score: 1)
Author: "Albert Crespo" <f5vhj@orange.fr>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 12:47:51 -0800
Yes, the entire operation of T2V should not count as anything. You cannot send an incorrect zone and expect it to be valid. Otherwise, for the next contest we should all send zone 34 in our exchange
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-11/msg00512.html (8,409 bytes)

35. [CQ-Contest] Fw: T2V (score: 1)
Author: "Albert Crespo" <f5vhj@orange.fr>
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 12:57:54 -0800
Often in CQWW someone gives a report that is clearly in error. For example,, if KL7XXX gives a report of 599002, that in my mind indicates the operator does not know the rules of CQWW. I tell KL7XXX
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-11/msg00555.html (11,044 bytes)

36. Re: [CQ-Contest] dit dit dit (score: 1)
Author: "Albert Crespo" <f5vhj@orange.fr>
Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2011 06:09:50 -0800
Bob, I got one better- how about EEEE for a report? Why do you bother with zone 4 when the argument is that the robot determines your zone anyway? 73, Albert I have contest logs from the '60s where R
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-12/msg00008.html (8,663 bytes)

37. Re: [CQ-Contest] Remote Control in Contests (score: 1)
Author: "Albert Crespo" <f5vhj@orange.fr>
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 10:38:57 -0800
So according to the rules , remote QSOs are good for CQ, but not for ARRL DX credit. How is a person supposed to know who is remote or not for DXCC purposes? How is the League going to know if a stat
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-04/msg00117.html (10,894 bytes)

38. Re: [CQ-Contest] Remote Control in Contests (score: 1)
Author: "Albert Crespo" <f5vhj@orange.fr>
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 10:35:26 -0800
So, remote control is the same as just being there. Well, I propose to hire the guy that set up all the bank servers on Nauru (C21) to put up a ham station and hook it up to the Internet. Instead of
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-04/msg00195.html (11,473 bytes)

39. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ Magazine Award Policy for Remote Base Operations (score: 1)
Author: "Albert Crespo" <f5vhj@orange.fr>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 05:49:10 -0800
Is there the perception that operating from a doggy place where if you forget to use bottle water to brush your teeth can cause disease is equivalent to operating from the comforts of your own home?
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-06/msg00198.html (11,320 bytes)

40. Re: [CQ-Contest] Split operation in CQ WW CW (score: 1)
Author: "Albert Crespo" <f5vhj@orange.fr>
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2012 08:55:45 -0500
Bob probably meant to get across the concept that one should not listen up 5 as expeditions do so. If the pileup is really getting out of hand, then up 1 should be enough as long as those calling do
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-08/msg00306.html (12,066 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu