Such statistics may prove hard to find: so few stations send anything other
than 5nn anyway, the number of people who could, if they wanted to, bust an
RST is small.
I do, however, know from experience that ARRL log-checking checks all
elements of an exchange. I've had QSOs busted in SS because any one element
was wrong.
In the paper days, I can certainly see how busted exchanges could be missed.
And while it's certainly possible for software to fail, I think today, the
chances of a busted exchange surviving the log-checking process is
considerably smaller.
As for cut numbers, use them if you wish. If I don't get it, it's my
responsibility to ask you for a fill. Darwinism will tell you if it's wise
to continue using them. Too much time lost to fills on cut numbers means you
shouldn't be using them. Or that you need to use them more wisely. (A cut
number in your callsign will probably waste quite a bit of time. Two 'n's
after a 5 is pretty standard. I don't even flinch hearing Enn anymore.)
I think just as we can turn up the speed when we're working someone we know
is a hot CW op, but leave it alone when we're not sure how fast the other
guy can copy, it's probably wise to be selective in who gets the hot-shot
cut-number exchange and who should probably get a conventional exchange.
bv,
kelly,
ve4xt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul O'Kane" <pokane@ei5di.com>
To: "David Pruett" <k8cc@comcast.net>
Cc: <CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, January 01, 2007 12:17 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Log-checking and RST [was: cut numbers]
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Pruett" <k8cc@comcast.net>
> To: "Paul O'Kane" <pokane@ei5di.com>
> Cc: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
>
>> I find it very amusing that people make statements about how logs are (or
>> are not) checked without any information to support their assertions. I
>> am part of the logchecking team for the ARRL 10M contest and know for a
>> fact that in regards to that contest (and the ARRL 160 as well) that he
>> is wrong.
>
> Please consider this post to be an effort to contact
> the logchecking teams to get a definitive answer on
> the subject of busted RSTs.
>
> You claim that QSOs in ARRL 10M and ARRL 160M are
> busted if the exchanged and logged RSTs do not match.
>
> 1. Can you give statistics or examples, for both
> contests, where points were deducted solely
> because of a mismatch between exchanged and
> logged RSTs?
>
> 2. Is there a corresponding UBN or error report for
> each entrant reflecting RST errors only?
>
> 3. What is the position with other HF contests
> organised by ARRL which require an exchange of
> reports - such as ARRL DX and IARU HF?
>
> Where necessary, please forward these questions to
> the appropriate logchecking teams.
>
> 73,
> Paul EI5DI
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|