CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] RDXC Log Checking

To: CQ Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] RDXC Log Checking
From: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 13:53:39 -0700
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 10:02:39PM +0200, Tonno Vahk wrote:
> Hi Bob,
> 
> I don't agree that ignoring weak stations and CQing instead is a fruitful
> strategy for an ordinary station in any contest. 

I disagree.

In the past, I have spent painfully long times completing weak, weak QSOs 
that afterward look like tactical mistakes because if I just called CQ, 
odds are that I could have made 2 or 3 QSOs in the same time period, and 
the weak, weak station I worked might end up being a lot louder in another 
hour anyway.  Learning where that threshold is between workable and "not 
worth it even if I do complete the QSO" is something I've been learning 
with practice.

-- 
Kenneth E. Harker WM5R
kenharker@kenharker.com
http://www.kenharker.com/

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

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