CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Counting uniques

To: Bill Parry <bparry@rgv.rr.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Counting uniques
From: brian coyne <g4odv@yahoo.co.uk>
Reply-to: brian coyne <g4odv@yahoo.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 07:28:51 +0000 (UTC)
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
To be fair to Charley, who kicked off this thread, he did not actually cite the 
CQ Contests as to where/when his high 'Unique' count occurred.
As attested by Jorma & John there is no way such a high proportion could happen 
in a major contest, however it does occur in smaller contests and, as a result, 
DX stns can be unfairly penalised when uniques are stripped out.
Therefore, after disregarding his rant about American bosses of American 
contests, what Charley wrote is correct and, in fact, I can better his claim of 
33% uniques. Some years ago I entered the UN (Kazakh) contest and made no small 
number of contacts (around 900 IIRC). I had 40% disallowed because they were 
uniques. The reason obviously was due to the fact that most entrants were EU, 
Central & East EU plus Asiatic Russia whom, due to their high numbers in each 
entity would not be sought multipliers whereas I was the only mult operating 
from my entity being of interest to ops who were active looking for some dx and 
not interested in that contest.
Obviously such a contest with those rules carries a penalty for dx stns and is 
a disincentive to participate and I have not operated that contest since.
I would say that it is a fair bet that in the major contests dx stns will have 
a higher percentage of uniques than your average K! or K3 guy whilst agreeing 
that the margin will not be so significant and I would not object to seeing 
them stripped out, especially if it helps weed out entrants of the UT5UGR 
(TO7A) persuasion.
73  Brian C4Z / 5B4AIZ.
      From: Bill Parry <bparry@rgv.rr.com>
 To: john@kk9a.com; cq-contest@contesting.com 
 Sent: Tuesday, 8 September 2015, 6:41
 Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Counting uniques
   
I got the same impression from the survey.  I also feel the same way
regarding removal of uniques.  I was taken aback at the idea that someone
might have 50% uniques.  Surely there is some way of DQ someone for this
besides deleting a couple of uniques form everyone's logs.  Since I have
stopped contesting for a score, I frequently get on and make a couple of Qs
in a contest or possibly work a new one. 

Bill W5VX

-----Original Message-----
From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
john@kk9a.com
Sent: Monday, September 07, 2015 6:44 PM
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Counting uniques

This subject came up as a result of the CQWW Survey.  Question 10 states: "A
unique callsign is one that is reported only by one station. Most unique
calls are copying errors. Should all QSOs with unique callsigns be removed
from the score during the log checking?"  Asking this would lead people to
believe that removing all unique IS something being considered by the
committee.  I voted no as some unique are indeed valid QSOs.

John KK9A



To:    Radio K0HB <kzerohb@gmail.com>
Subject:    Re: [CQ-Contest] Counting uniques
From:    John Dorr via CQ-Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Reply-to:    John Dorr <k1ar@aol.com>
Date:    Mon, 7 Sep 2015 09:12:33 -0400

All,

As is often said on this channel, "calm down." No one is advocating that all

uniques be removed from logs and be classified as bad calls. Of course there

are examples such as Hans' QSO and others.

The point is that in a large contest such as the CQWW, it is very rare to
work a station that no one else has worked, thus suggesting that many of the
unique QSOs that show up in logs are probably busted calls.

A high ratio of uniques is nothing more than an indicator to a log checker
for most contests.

No worries -- your uniqueness is safe! See you in this thread in 2018 when
we pick up where we left off this time. :-)

Has anyone done anything interesting this summer to get ready for the fall
contest season?

73, John, K1AR

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