CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] 1 pointers for CQWW

To: ve4xt@mts.net, cq-contest@contesting.com, w9xt@unifiedmicro.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] 1 pointers for CQWW
From: W0uo@cs.com
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 10:53:43 EST
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Hi all:

Forgive me if this sentiment has been mentioned before.

If I understand NQ4I's argument, he asserts that he worked 600 zero pointers 
and that these QSOs diminished his capacity to work QSOs which count, thereby 
decreasing his score. 

Good CW operators should be able to work about 240 qsos per hour assuming 
stations are available to support the rate, which, unfortunately, they mostly 
are 
not.

600 zero point qsos over 6 bands over 48 hours looks like about 4 qsos per 
hour assuming each band is only open half the time, 2 qsos per hour assuming 
each band is open for the full 48 hours.

The questions I have are:  How much actual damage, if any, was done?  Did any 
of the zero pointers gain a benefit from the QSO?  Does this really suggest 
that a change of rules is in order?

I think Kelly, VE4XT has it right, work 'em and move on.  It is not only more 
productive to do so, but demonstrates the best manners and will not 
unnecessarily antagonize the casual participants.

My $.01 worth.

73 de Jim
W0UO/5
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

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