My take on the whole infrequent ID thing is this.
1. If you're not going to be competitive, chill. Put the guy into memory and
come back later. Almost all the other stations in the pileup have an
advantage over you already: they know who he is and that they need him. Ham
radio is not supposed to be ulcer-inducing, especially for the casual ops.
2. If you are going to be competitive, chill. Put the guy into memory and
come back later. You're going to waste more time than it's worth stewing and
getting hot under the collar than his mult is worth. Go work other guys.
Make up for this guy with better rate and then snag him when you come back
and win twice. You might sit there long enough only to find out you already
have him (or his country- and/or zone-mates). So you've wasted 30 seconds
for nothing. Way to go.
You can blame him, but he's not the one who decided to wait him out.
I know it's tempting to sit there and think "How could he be SO
inconsiderate TO ME?" as anger boils up.
Well, you're not the only guy in his pileup.
Am I saying he's in the right to not ID frequently? Not at all. He might be
hurting his overall score, particularly when you notice that many of the
most successful operators in history ID on every Q.
But you can only control how YOU react. React the right way and improve your
score by doing so.
Is this a good rule? Probably. Will it be enforced? Perhaps. Perhaps not.
But at least someone is offering a guideline in the rules for gentlemanly
behaviour.
73, kelly
ve4xt
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind - Gandhi
On 1/30/14 8:31 PM, "Radio K0HB" <kzerohb@gmail.com> wrote:
> Why should I wait 30 seconds to hear an ID? My time is just as valuable as
> the run-station. As you point out, I could make 2 or 3 more Q's in the time
> I'm expected to wait for him to favor his audience with an ID.
And who are
> those "common folks" who should just go away?
73, de Hans, K0HB/K7
🌵
> Sent from Arizona 🌞
On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 19:08, N2GC
> <n2gc@aol.com="mailto:n2gc@aol.com";>> wrote:
On Jan 30, 2014, at 10:14 AM,
> Marc Domen <on7ss.oo9o@gmail.com> wrote:
> And why not put in the rules to
> id after every contact. Would it bring the
> number of QSO's down.
>
> It
> probably will, but then the odds would be even for all.
Id after every
> contact does level the playing field for everyone in the competition. IMHO I
> think this would be a good rule.
The argument that less QSO's would result
> is not necessarily true. Looking at Valery R5GA's record rates website.
>
http://rate.r5ga.com/
There are a few well known single ops in the top
> ten that I'd after every contact. In fact a few had the best rate some years
> in certain contests.
73 Mike
> N2GC
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|