NAQP rules in CQ
N0bsh at aol.com
N0bsh at aol.com
Thu Jul 21 11:51:05 EDT 1994
I just received my August '94 CQ. I was scanning through
the NAQP rules listed in this issue and was wondering about
a couple things.
1) There appears to be a mistake in that it says multi-ops
operate 10 out of 12 hours. Nothing about single-ops.
2) In the suggested frequencies 28.600 is still listed as a
meeting place (28.450 as well - novice). Couldn't this
be just .450? I doubt anybody really listens that high
3) It says to send team registration to K8CC. I know Dave
used to be involved but I thought he passed his NAQP
duties on to others.
Granted none of this is earth-shattering. Perhaps it's just
some updating needs to be done. I'd hate to see a new
contester (say, one who doesn't get NCJ yet) have a bad
experience in this FUN contest and be turned off because of
n0bsh at aol.com
>From Steve Harrison <sharriso at sysplan.com> Thu Jul 21 15:34:10 1994
From: Steve Harrison <sharriso at sysplan.com> (Steve Harrison)
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 1994 10:34:10 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: CT VER 8.XX scoring
Message-ID: <Pine.3.87.9407211010.B17822-0100000 at eagle>
My CT version 8.47 scored FD wrong but in a different manner. We claimed
QRP this year, and CT got our 10 points for CW and 5 points for SSB OK.
However, it also did not count the bonuses correctly, cheating us of 200
points. I first did the usual WRITELOG which created the summary sheet
etc. and found the missing bonus point problem. I then went back into CT
with the same *.bin file and examined what bonuses I had checked; I found
CT had "corrected" my QRP and public QTH to 150 watts and no public QTH.
I recorrected those, went into the logging mode to check that the summary
window scored things correctly (which it did), then did another WRITELOG
(I had renamed the old files created the first time something else so
they would neither be overwritten or cause problems when I did another
WRITELOG). THe 2nd *.SUM sheet showed the exact same problem; 200 fewer
bonus points than we should have had.
I repeated the whole thing still a third time, except I exited CT BEFORE
doing a WRITELOG, then went back in a 4th time. The summary sheet showed
the correct score for the 4th time indicating that the bonus point
corrections I had made during the 3rd running were properly recorded in
the *.bin log file. Then I did a WRITELOG, and STILL found the bonuses
not credited! At this point, I gave up and simply edited the text files
using my favorite word processor.
I recall that when I operated 1D several years ago, I had just received
my first version 7 copy, and it had the double QSO point problem. When I
called up the same file with my old version 6, the score was correct.
I've long learned not to trust the scoring of CT in any contest, but to
check each and every QSO and the summary score by eye. I have also long
wondered how many others have accepted CT's scoring on blind faith,
submitted a log, then found the log to be scored differently by the
contest sponsor and blasted the sponsor for what the submitter thought
was inordinate attention paid to their own entry.
And I've also been glad that I've never had a couple thousand Q log to
check over! CT is the best contest logging program I've seen, but it
can't do math worth a plugged nickel. 73, Steve KO0U/4
More information about the CQ-Contest