RE: kr2q comments
I don't place much credence in claims that anyone getting more than a fraction
of a percent uniques must be copying call signs wrong. I can think of a number
of situations where the numbers would be significantly higher, especially for
DX contests.
The easiest I can share here would be for activation of a very rare DXCC
country, Zone number, or IOTA island. These operations are often very well
publicized, very loud on the bands, and actively spotted. There can be great
motivation on the part of thousands of operators to work these stations once or
even six times during a single contest even for those who don't plan to work
any other contest participants or send in a log. Here, 50% uniques sounds
reasonably plausible to me.
I have been at multioperator contests where off-duty operators lined up to work
expeditions from a mobile station outside the shack. These operators know they
will not send in a log, know there may even be prohibitions in the contest
rules, and yet these contacts don't represent miscopied callsigns, and there
really should be no penalty for these contacts in a log.
Leigh S. Jones KR6X
> On Sep 8, 2015, at 05:37, kr2q@optimum.net wrote:
>
> Gee whiz. I hate rumors.
>
> First, the only people with a U rate of 50% are people who make 2 QSOs and
> get one wrong.
>
> Most U rates are very small (the vast majority are under 0.5%). Yes, that is
> one half of 1%.
>
> Please remember that Uniques which are cross-checked to the "valid" QSO
> become B or F calls.
>
> Here are the results from a recent contest. Column on the left is Unique
> "category." That is
> 0.5% is for all entrants with 0.0% uniques to 0.5% uniques. 1.0% is for
> entrants with more
> than 0.5% up to an including 1.0% uniques.
>
> The number "to the right" is the number of calls fitting into that category.
>
> I have not eliminated any U% category which did not have at least 1 "member."
> I have
> limited this to only entrants with at least 300 QSOs, although it doesn't
> change much when
> everybody is included.
>
> I hope this puts a damper on all of the wild speculation.
>
> I sure hope this "displays" OK enough to read.
>
>
> % Uniq AB_H_A
> 0.5% 734
> 1.0% 40
> 1.5% 8
> 2.0% 1
> 2.5% 1
> 3.0% 1
> 4.0%
>
> % Uniq AB_H_U
> 0.5% 444
> 1.0% 27
> 1.5% 4
> 2.0% 2
> 2.5% 3
> 3.0%
> 4.0% 2
>
> % Uniq AB_L_A
> 0.5% 462
> 1.0% 17
> 1.5% 3
> 2.0%
> 2.5%
> 3.0%
> 4.0%
>
> % Uniq AB_L_U
> 0.5% 704
> 1.0% 33
> 1.5% 7
> 2.0% 2
> 2.5%
> 3.0%
> 4.0%
>
> % Uniq AB_Q_A
> 0.5% 31
> 1.0%
> 1.5%
> 2.0%
> 2.5%
> 3.0%
> 4.0%
>
> % Uniq AB_Q_U
> 0.5% 68
> 1.0% 2
> 1.5% 1
> 2.0%
> 2.5%
> 3.0%
> 4.0%
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|