RTTY
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RTTY] B4

To: rtty@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [RTTY] B4
From: Robert Chudek - K0RC <k0rc@citlink.net>
Reply-to: k0rc@citlink.net
Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2012 14:53:58 -0500
List-post: <rtty@contesting.com">mailto:rtty@contesting.com>
I only remember getting one "QSO B4" over the weekend. It was an EU station. I typed "NOT IN MY LOG, TOO BAD". He came right back and worked me. I did take a minute to sort my log and look to see if I had mis-copied his call earlier, but I didn't find anything obvious.

There was a reverse instance when a station called me and he was a dupe. I sent my exchange and he came back "SRI Q B4". I responded with my normal QSL K0RC CQ and this didn't even break my stride.

My statement of banning QSO B4 from the airwaves might have been a little harsh, but for a new contester it seems to be a fun "gimmick" that in the long run can cost him points or multipliers. And I know the old-timers have kicked this horse to death over the years, but it's still warm and twitching for the fellows just starting out in digital contesting.

73 de Bob - KØRC in MN

------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 10/1/2012 2:21 PM, BILL ENGLISH wrote:
Not being on both logs is not the case all of the time. In fact it is
the case in a very small percentage of the time.
I use QSO B4 because out of the many who called me again after working
me during the weekend, say 50 out of 1400 QSO's. Only 3 actually
needed dupes. I have a macro QSO B4, NEED DUPE? and another one that
says NOT IN LOG PLEASE DUPE ME, I used the latter macro once this
weekend.
It would have wasted more time attempt to work all those QSO's again.
I mis-copied one call and I was already in his log, if he would have
just said QSOB4 I would have moved on a lot quicker and had one less
dupe in the log. Of course this is a matter of opinion.

73

Bill K4FX

On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 3:28 AM, Robert Chudek - K0RC <k0rc@citlink.net> wrote:
There seems to be a lot of new calls this weekend. Jot down the call sign
where you got the QSO B4 and after the contest, forward a copy of your
message to him. The fellow might just be starting out and doesn't know that
QSO B4 was banned from the airwaves. It's an opportunity to Elmer someone
just getting started.

I am seeing a lot of fellows also CQing but not putting a trailing CQ after
their call sign. That's my favorite nit pick. When I tune across someone and
I only get a call sign, I start reciting "wasted time, wasted time, wasted
time..." until they finish calling CQ again.

But then if I was REAL serious about this contest, I wouldn't be on the
internet writing emails either... "wasted time, wasted time, wasted time..."

73 de Bob - KØRC in MN

------------------------------------------------------------------------


On 9/29/2012 1:28 AM, jim wrote:
Why would anyone  use  B 4

I am NOT a big contester  and  I only do S&P
I use N1MM    and IF there is a DUPE  the program  lets me know.

So when I call a station  and he tells me  B4
Yes I am in his log  but HE is NOT in my log
Maybe because I did not log him when we had QSO
Maybe I logged his call incorrect
Or I never printed his report  and he moved on to the next station calling
as some contest stations are in a hurry.
OR many other reasons

But just the same  I always send my log in  even if I only make a few
QSO's

So  when I call and you tell me B4   the QSO will not count for you
As there will  be NO match ..

SO JUST FORGET THE B4 AND WORK ME
Then u will get credit for the QSO.

Most likely you can work me about as fast as doing the B4   tx.



from the shack of
WB5AAA
73 de JIM


_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty

_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty

_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty

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