But if "Skimmer" was part of the "Assisted" category then your "unassisted"
record wouldn't be affected...or did I miss something in the translation? I'm
assuming your 10m SBSO effort was of the unassisted kind...
Marty
W1MD
---- Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>
>
> K3NA:
>
> > 3. In 2010 June, review the results of the past two years to determine
> a) Does the use of a CW skimmer have a material impact on scores?
> b) If yes, do the award categories need to be changed in some way?
>
> What do you do if records set without Skimmer were
> broken *with* Skimmer? For example I'm quite sure my 10m records
> would all be higher if I had access to multipliers available to
> multiop stations (with typically 10% higher mults).
>
> CQ WW CW SOSB/10 record (2000):
> 28 W4ZV 965,874 1984 37 137 00
>
> CQ WW CWMulti-Multi record (1999):
> Call: KC1XX
> 10 2020 38 151 Steve K6AW,Matt
>
> Excuse me but it doesn't take rocket science to see the
> the potential impact of Skimmer on (previously) unassisted
> records.
> 73, Bill W4ZV
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|