My rationalization goes as follows:
In the old days, before computer log checking, de-duping and re-scoring
submitted logs would have been an onerous chore for the adjudicators. I
would guess that it was probably not done for all logs, perhaps only for
top scores or near-ties.
One of the easiest ways to cheat on your total score would have been simply
to include dupes in your score, with what might have been a reasonable
chance of not being detected. So, a disincentive would have been needed to
ensure that entrants did their own de-duping before calculating their
scores. Hence the penalties.
Nowadays, it is impossible to cheat that way, because every log is de-duped
and re-scored automatically by the log checking software. In fact, the
adjudicators want dupe contacts left in, because they can be useful for
cross-checking.
73,
Rich VE3KI
AF5CC wrote:
This question came to me again thru a thread on eham.net but I have thought of
this question during almost every contest but could never come up with an
answer.
In the old days we used paper logs with dupe sheets (remember those?). If you
left a duplicate QSO in your log, it was removed but you were also penalized
1-3 additional QSOs, depending on contest. Now we have computer logging, where
it immediately tells you if a station is a dupe. However, you can leave dupe
QSOs in your log (and are kind of encouraged to) with no penalty.
Now this seems backwards-you were penalized when duping when determining dupes
took more effort, but you are not penalized when duping is done automatically
and is obvious to you.
Does someone know the reasoning behind this?
73 John AF5CC
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|