CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Dupes or Duped?

To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Dupes or Duped?
From: "K1TTT" <k1ttt@arrl.net>
Reply-to: k1ttt@arrl.net
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 23:24:37 -0000
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
They are old school contesters who used to worry about the number of dupes
in the log because they misunderstood the disqualification statements in the
rules that said 'too many UNCLAIMED dupes is grounds for disqualification'
(paraphrased and emphasized by me).  Even in the old days of paper logs you
didn't get dq'ed for too many dupes, you got dq'ed if you didn't properly
score them as zero points.  But the misconception lives on, and on, and on.
By not working you 'again' that station loses 3 times your point value if
you submit your log.

What they really don't understand is that there is NO penalty for dupes in a
computerized logs... you don't even have to mark them as zero points because
the log checking computer does that for you when they rescore your log.
BUT, the thing that used to be hard, cross checking qso's to make sure they
are in the other guy's log is MUCH easier today than it used to be, so
penalties for NIL are taken off much more frequently now.  So there is even
more of a reason to log the dupes, and absolutely no penalty in doing so.
In most cases it's even faster to log the dupe and send TU than it is to
send QSO B4 and maybe argue with the stubborn guy who won't go away.


David Robbins K1TTT
e-mail: mailto:k1ttt@arrl.net
web: http://www.k1ttt.net
AR-Cluster node: 145.69MHz or telnet://dxc.k1ttt.net
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:cq-contest-
> bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Dennis OConnor
> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 22:24
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Dupes or Duped?
> 
> One of the issues I encountered during the contest I decided to bring up
> here is the issue of dupes...
> A few times during the contest I called a DX only to be told to 'buzz off
> you are a dupe!'  In each of those times I had not worked them before, I
> had not worked them and broken their call, such as substituting 5 for H, B
> for D, etc., I had not worked their grandfather, or even dated their
> sister...  My sending 'not in log', was greeted with being CQ'd in my
> face...  OK, I contest for fun so I shrugged and moved on... But I do not
> understand those stations that act like a dupe contact is akin to catching
> a social disease... In each of those cases the DX had logged a Q with my
> call and now he has a bad Q that will not match in my log...   Working me
> "again" would have at least recovered a couple of those lost points...
> 
> Maybe the group can explain to me why these ops are so phobic about
> logging a dupe?  Now, for those stations I did actually dupe because I
> caught a partial call in heavy qrm and/or tail ended someone <mea culpa>,
> I did log those so that both our logs match and all is well...
> Interestingly, the big shooters that I did dupe accidentally <HC8N> for
> one simply worked me again in 2 seconds flat without comment and we both
> moved on; a win-win...
> 
> denny / k8do
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Check out the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta - Fire up a more powerful email and
> get things done faster.
> _______________________________________________
> 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

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