To clarify, the TU in 4. is only superfluous because the confirmation (of
receipt of report) is implied by the fact that W1AW probably wouldn't be
sending his report if he hadn't received NC6K's report. IOW, don't conclude
that two-way confirmation is not good practice. Confirmation just may be
achieved indirectly. Still, many top contesters explicitly include a TU or
R with their S&P report. It's friendly, clear and doesn't reduce rate
enough to affect OOF (Order Of Finish).
Ed W0YK
-----Original Message-----
From: CQ-Contest <cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com> On Behalf Of Jim Brown
Sent: 30 July, 2019 20:03
To: cq-contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WWDIGI Contest Testing...
On 7/30/2019 4:02 PM, egruff@cox.net wrote:
> TU QRZ NC6K
In the CW exchange, TU is superfluous in 4. In 5, QRZ is superfluous in
most contest applications. It's only good use in contesting is to ask
someone whose call you didn't copy to call again.
73, Jim K9YC
_______________________________________________
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
|