CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Fw: Just when you think

To: Bob Henderson <bob@cytanet.com.cy>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Fw: Just when you think
From: Hank Kohl K8DD <k8dd@usol.com>
Reply-to: k8dd@arrl.net
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:49:01 -0500
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Bob Henderson wrote:

Igor

I guess one event probably influenced me most in my thinking about penalties
for badly copied calls.  I won't name the individual concerned as my
thoughts relate more to principle than personality but:

While S&P in a recent major event, I called a very well known contest
station.  Although he was very strong with me and I suspect I was with him,
it took three calls, in between which he called CQ, before I got a response.
When it came, the response was "Worked before".  I replied with "Not in log"
and the station responded with  "You copied my call wrong".  I imediately
knew which contact he was referring to, as I had only logged one other
contact with his entity on that band.  So I said, "You didnt correct your
call".  He replied, "No, I get multiplier, you get penalty....Hi!".

In CQ WW CW we were in Zone 2 using VO2AAA. A couple of times, when things slowed down, I went S&Ping. I was amazed at the number of stations who told me "dupe" or "B4" that were not in the log ..... on any band! And some of them were very loud, very good ops.

In every case we had the multipliers (US and Zone 3, 4, or 5), but I would send NIL and get "dupe" back. Oh well ..... I hope they worked one of the other Zone 2's who were part time.

I've found, especially in CQ WW, it's easier to work the dupe than tell them they are a dupe. And ID every couple QSO's, or so, when things are going fast.

73 Hank K8DD


--



'Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.' -anon


_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

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