CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

[CQ-Contest] Faster results for CW SS?

Subject: [CQ-Contest] Faster results for CW SS?
From: ku8e1@yahoo.com (Jeffrey Clarke)
Date: Fri Nov 8 15:08:07 2002
 You would think the process would be quicker since everything is
computerized now. Before email came along (from what I remember) the CW
results would be in the Apr. issue of QST and SSB in May. Maybe that
10% of people who send paper logs are slowing down the process ?? 
Maybe they ought to just classify those paper logs a "check logs". I
doubt it would cause much of a fuss because I bet most of those logs
are probably from casual participants anyway...

             73's Jeff KU8E

--- Tree <tree@kkn.net> wrote:
> 
> Bill, WB0O asks:
> 
> >   The question is: why does it take until June to get
> > the results? The entire contest season will be over,
> > and it may (or may not) be summer here, and my mind
> > will be a million miles from contests.
> 
> I think it is easy to understand why this takes as long as it does. 
> First,
> it takes about 2 months to get all of the logs, and fix some of the
> problem
> logs up (those that are missing information or logged the contest in
> local
> time or sent in the previous year's log).  Then, the log crunching
> has to
> occur, and in the past few years, there has been work put into
> improving 
> the capabilities of that process at the same time.  Once the numbers
> are
> generated, then the writeup needs to be written and folded into the
> schedule
> of the two people in the contest department at the ARRL.  Then,
> finally, it
> goes off to the printers and gets mailed out using the slow mail.
> 
> And that doens't mention the paper logs that have to be dealt with
> manually
> (still about 10 percent).
> 
> Many things are changing that can reduce this time and already this
> has 
> happened.  The robots are helping clean up problem logs in real time.
> Publication of the results on the web eliminates the printing and 
> mailing delay.  The log checking process is near "perfection" and
> requires
> less development in parallel.  It might be very possible to have
> "final"
> results for all stations within two months of the contest.
> 
> The ARRL has come up with a new schedule for results, and things are
> moving
> up about 6 weeks for this year I understand.
> 
> WB0O goes on to wonder about uniques:
> 
> >   The question of what to do with uniques. This is
> > probably meat for a years worth of discussion. IMHO,
> > it seems that there should be NO uniques among the
> > top 100 or so scorers in the CWSS contest. 
> 
> This really isn't an issue in my opinion.  First off, uniques are
> only
> a problem if a log has a lot of them.  All logs are going to have a
> few,
> but when a log shows up with 10X the average (that aren't matched to 
> busted calls), then this raises suspicions.  
> 
> For sure, any uniques a top scoring station has will be looked at. 
> There
> have been some cases where it was obvious that "friends" got carried
> away
> using multiple callsigns.  These QSOs were not removed, but in most
> cases,
> these friends were encouraged to stick with one callsign, and to work
> some
> other stations in the contest.
> 
> But - just to be clear - no uniques are removed without being judged
> to
> be a busted callsign.
> 
> K4SB chimes in:
> 
> > I've gotten dinged for these "uniques" for the last 2 years. And
> > afraid I sent a nasty
> > email the last time. If it happens again, I'm going to send ARRL
> the
> > QSL card!
> 
> I am not sure this happened in the SS?  It takes a lot of unprobable 
> events to occur for any unique to be "dinged".  Please provide
> specific
> data if this is the case - as I would be intersted in knowing more
> about
> it.  Uniques are not removed from any log without being identified as
> a busted callsign.  This applies to all contests I am aware of
> (except
> the Internet Sprints and Keyman Club of Japan contests which require
> both logs to show the QSO to be counted).
> 
> If you are concerned about uniques being listed, then please
> understand
> this is a tool to detect people that have way too many uniques, a
> sign
> of manufactured QSOs.  It also flags possible bad QSOs that can later
> be
> judged to be busted either by the software or a human.
> 
> Finally, WB0O asks for my opinion (a dangerous thing):
> 
> > The results would be posted in a week. Tree, your comments? 
> 
> I would not want to make the call on who makes the top ten in a tight
> race
> without having all of the information available.  Part of the log
> checking
> process involves cross checking the QSOs with the logs we have.  This
> will
> detect not-in-log situations, as well as incorrect serial numbers.  
> 
> If we did this before all of the logs were in, the stations with
> higher
> error rates will look better than they should.  For each NIL not
> detected,
> there is a 2 QSO impact.  Thus, an inaccurate log will be more
> competitive
> without all of the logs being used in the process.
> 
> Therefore, I would suggest that if you wanted even faster results
> than 
> supported by the log submission deadline, you work to move up the log
> submission deadline for all logs.
> 
> Finally, AA4GA asks an interesting question:
> 
> > How would deleting uniques make the reporting process faster?
> 
> It makes it a LOT easier - because uniques are much easier to detect
> than
> busted calls.  You have no judgement involved at all.  A unique is
> simply
> a callsign that nobody else worked.  It takes a lot more work and
> time to 
> match these up to busted calls.  In a contest like the SS, that is
> pretty
> easy because of the "quality" of the exchage (lots of good
> information that
> can be used to help you match up the call).  For other contests, like
> the 
> ARRL DX and CQ WW, where the exchange is pretty useless, it is a lot
> harder.
> These contests would be about 100X times easier to check if uniques
> were
> just not counted.
> 
> Please understand I am not proposing this...  I am just answering the
> 
> question Lee asked.
> 
> Tree N6TR
> n6tr@arrl.org
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos
http://launch.yahoo.com/u2

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>