I received my log checking report for the 2010 Russian DX Contest the other day. These guys do a very high level of log checking and I commend them for it. I found the following in my report. 3.5 CW
At this point, I would N E V E R enter this contest!!! I'd rather be a net control OP for the goiter pain group.. 73- Chuck KI9A In a message dated 10/28/2010 6:23:05 P.M. Central Daylight Time, k5zd
hmmm... looks fishy to me... two Ukraine spots within 12 minutes of each other. Neither of which show up in your (revealed) log segment as worked. Or do they show up in your log properly but specific
I think randy misspoke... they don't penalize you for the other guy's mistakes, they just remove the qso without additional penalty. You only get a penalty for mistakes on your end, and then of cours
Even people who use crutches sometimes stumble. I received my log checking report for the 2010 Russian DX Contest the other day. These guys do a very high level of log checking and I commend them for
de K1TTT: penalty for mistakes on your end, and then of course the guy on the other end loses just the qso. So it all works out in the end. But those not-listening callers ate up precious opening tim
Both UZ5UA and US2IR are in my log at or before the time of the spots. Both of them submitted logs. Since they don't show up as busts for me, they must have copied my call correctly. Does make one wo
And those guys KNOW radio wave propagation "by hard" AT 6 ...7 IN THE MORNIG LOCKAL TIME - KH7 ON 80 METERS - GOOD JOB !!! :-)) _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list
Randy, are you suggesting the use of cluster to be disallowed in future RDXCs? 73, Sinisa YT1NT, 4O3A op in RDXC 2010 _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contes
I suspect that very few will agree with this, but...... When you call a runner, give HIS call at least once. I'm sure if the runner had any idea of what station the callers THOUGHT they were working,
Randy _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
A lot of people (including me) do it this way - (Him): CQ de RG8U (Me): W9SZ (Him): W9SZ 5NN 1043 (Me): RG8U 5NN 406 (Him): TU RG8U Hopefullly he copies my my pipsqueak signal well enough to hear I s
Let's be real. Nobody listens to their own call during the exchange. They are busy with radio #2 or something else. Like 599, if it's sent, it's just a placeholder. Barry W2UP -- Barry Kutner, W2UP L
Zack, While this is OK, the problem comes in when the exchange goes like this: Hopefully, your sending of his callsign (especially if it's wrong) will cause him to ID at least once instead of sending
They "penalize" everyone equally. If you want to completely avoid the problem, then don't run and just answer other guys' CQs. Of course your score will be much lower. You'll be happy to go back to
When people are only sending "QRZ?" I tend to listen for three or four QSO's at most and if they don't ID I pass them by. I see no sense in working someone whose call I don't know for sure. 73, Zack
Hi Zack I think that is the right way. But, lots also do it this way (Him): CQ de RG8U (Me): W7WHY (Him): W7WHY 5NN 1043 (Me): 5NN 406 (Him): TU RG8U Where in that sequence does it show that I got hi
but there are some that do it this way CQ TEST W7DRA W7VKZ W7VKZ W7DRA 599 WA W7DRA W7VKZ 599 OR TU QRZ W7DRA i prefer CQ TEST W7DRA W7VKZ W7VKZ W7DRA GOOD TO HEAR U BT UR 599+ HR IN WASHINGTON STATE
The other situation this comes up is split-frequency on 75/40m phone, where multiple stations may be sharing the same receiving frequency (it DOES happen). Sending the other station's callsign tells