> 1) One reason I am glad to see closer checking is due to it's ability to
> reduce the 'fudge factor' people inventing callsigns they worked. This was
> in particular a problem with ARRL contests in the past, yet I note that
> uniques are not removed from the score. I imagine this would present a
> large problem anyway, but my question is: at what threshold do the log
> checkers, based on % uniques decide that the log needs closer investigation
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 up
with one unique (maybe two). In my case, this was because a large
number of locals worked me, and nobody else.
Next time, I hope to encourage them to go work a handful of other
people so they aren't unique.
On SSB, the percentage of uniques is higher. Guys in rare places
like Puerto Rico have higher ones.
There are things we look for and criteria for looking more carefully,
but they are best kept as secrets.
> 2) I understand the loss of points for a busted exchange, but nukeing the
> qso may not always be the desired effect.
>
> QSO #411 VE4GV : A 67 Mb should be A 72 Mb
>
> >or worse............ I could be VE4VV !!! ( Ha ! Gotcha Derrick ! )
>
> QSO #667 VE4VV : Q 67 Mb should be Q 73 Mb
>
> Heh heh, guess we bombed on both VE4 QSO's... now I can understand that I
> get 0
> points for these qso's, but I have trouble swallowing the process telling me
> I didn't work a VE4 ...
> clean sweep or not !
You don't get credit for a QSO if you didn't get the information correct.
You can't get multipliers for a QSO you don't have credit for.
There are also checks against calling uniques as bad QSOs that
just happened to be similar to a real call. Essentially, if the
check and section don't match the call I think it is, the call
won't be called bad.
This means you can reduce your chances of having bad calls if you
consistently copy the check or section wrong... however, this
will probably not pay off in the long run!!
However, I do understand the ARRL is processing things like mugs
based upon the pre-checked score.
BTW - there was a perfect 79x79 log on SSB!! Congrats to N2BIM.
Tree
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|