SPRINT MULTS
BillK5GA at aol.com
BillK5GA at aol.com
Wed Sep 14 14:20:16 EDT 1994
I just have to say the following concerning multipliers and the "conquest at
all cost so that you can say you win" attitude displayed by some of the top
sprint operators.
I simply cannot believe that you can find some CO2, FG5, etc down on the end
of 40 meters who gives you exactly per the rules a correct Sprint exchange.
Further, lets do this fast enough so that your CQ on the other band will stop
in time so that you can work the station who is calling you. This is pure
CRAP. I finally got one of the top multiplier-working stations to admit that
he doesn't get K****** CO2** NR 1 JOSE CUBA" sent to him. He says "well,
it is implied". Give me a frigging break!!!!
And while I'm at it, I have heard of certain SPRINT TEAMS meeting and working
each other back and forth in order to boost the Q totals!! This simply makes
me SICK. What ever happened to competing honestly in order that the best one
wins. Our whole world is acting like this, so I guess it is an acceptable
evolution of radio contesting to follow along.?????!!!!
Bill K5GA
>From Jeffrey Clarke <jdclarke at freenet.columbus.oh.us> Wed Sep 14 17:37:38 1994
From: Jeffrey Clarke <jdclarke at freenet.columbus.oh.us> (Jeffrey Clarke)
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 12:37:38 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: WM4T sprint score
Message-ID: <Pine.3.07.9409141238.A20205-c100000 at acme.freenet.columbus.oh.us>
Score for WM4T in Cw Sprint :
Band QSOS
----- ------
80 0 ouch !!
40 106
20 54
------------------------
160 Q's x 37 mults = 5920
Operator : KU8E
Team : Mad River Radio Club
Hope I helped everyone with the KY multipler
which is pretty scarce anymore in the sprint. ( on CW mostly )
WM4T excuses for such a bad score ( my two cents worth )
1) Missed first 15 mins.
2) No antenna rotor for first 1/2 hour on 20m with beam toward EU
3) 80 meter antenna was broken. 0 QSO's on an important band
here in the midwest.
4) Bad CONDX... which is the norm in the midwest anymore now
KY will be on in the sprint on a more regular basis now that
we have John's station on the air again after a 3 year absence.
Here's my opinon on the multipler issue : I think
we should keep them. The same stations that always have the
top scores will still have the top scores and taking away multiplers
will not make a difference. If someone does sneak into the top ten
with an exceptional multipler count they deserve to be there because
thay probably had a good operating strategy that found them all their
multiplers.
I think an issue that needs to be addressed more than the
multipler issue is to come up with a change to increase activity in the
sprints. (especially CW) Why not have a low power class ?? If you did
this all those stations that give up after the 1st hour in frustation
because they can't work anyone would maybe stay on the whole 4 hours
giving everyone more QSO's. You could have a top ten box for the low
power stations so they could have a chance to have a feeling of
accomplishment for their effort. I think that's why the NA QSO party
is so popular with some people because they have a chance to maybe
win. A lot of the stations that you work in the NA QSO party never
even show up for the sprint and both are sponered by NCJ !!
73's Jeff KU8E
jdclarke at freenet.columbus.oh.us
>From jholly at hposl42.cup.hp.com (Jim Hollenback) Wed Sep 14 18:52:49 1994
From: jholly at hposl42.cup.hp.com (Jim Hollenback) (Jim Hollenback)
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 10:52:49 -0700
Subject: MFJ-784 DSP
Message-ID: <9409141052.ZM23131 at hpwsmjh.cup.hp.com>
Anyone have a MFJ-784? Any comments?
Thanks,
Jim, WA6SDM
jholly at cup.hp.com
>From fhmoore at nemed.b11.ingr.com (frank moore) Wed Sep 14 19:42:00 1994
From: fhmoore at nemed.b11.ingr.com (frank moore) (frank moore)
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 94 13:42:00 CDT
Subject: Sprint Mults
Message-ID: <199409141842.AA09223 at nemed.b11.ingr.com>
Bill K5GA wrote:
> he doesn't get K****** CO2** NR 1 JOSE CUBA" sent to him. He says "well,
> it is implied". Give me a frigging break!!!!
>
I agree, the "exchange" of implied data doesn't cut it. I assume that it is ok
to query the CO2 to get the info you need, though. If it isn't then I guess
I am in violation (at least in NAQP SSB) where I often try to get replies by
listing the info I need when I call cq. (Silly, I know but it does relieve
the Sun afternoon boredom)
Frank, KE4GY
fhmoore at ingr.com
>From Peter G. Smith" <n4zr at netcom.com Wed Sep 14 20:09:15 1994
From: Peter G. Smith" <n4zr at netcom.com (Peter G. Smith)
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 12:09:15 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: FCC Telephone report
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9409141230.A29324-0100000 at netcom>
Several copies received -- thanks to everybody who responded so quickly.
73, Pete
N4ZR at netcom.com
"Better, faster,cheaper -- choose any two"
>From Peter G. Smith" <n4zr at netcom.com Wed Sep 14 20:01:05 1994
From: Peter G. Smith" <n4zr at netcom.com (Peter G. Smith)
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 12:01:05 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Need latest pkunzip 2.08
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9409141208.A29324-0100000 at netcom>
I think you need pkunzip.exe from PKZIP 2.04g. You can get a
self-extracting file of it by FTP from oak.oakland.edu. GL
73, Pete
N4ZR at netcom.com
"Better, faster,cheaper -- choose any two"
On Wed, 14 Sep 1994, Robert Penneys wrote:
>
> I got the uuencoded N6TR log which seems to need PKunzip 2.08 to
> unfold. Is this available onqp on the network? Tnx Bob
>
>From fish at crl.com (Bill Fisher, KM9P Concentric Systems, Inc.) Wed Sep 14 20:45:21 1994
From: fish at crl.com (Bill Fisher, KM9P Concentric Systems, Inc.) (Bill Fisher, KM9P Concentric Systems, Inc.)
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 12:45:21 -0700
Subject: Sprint
Message-ID: <199409141945.AA29338 at mail.crl.com>
You want to change some rules, how about these...
1) No prearranged (prior to the contest) schedules or contacts will be
allowed via amateur or nonamateur means.
*** This will eliminate (should) skeds and teams meeting on 2 freqs and
running up there Q's.
2) An entire exchange must be sent and received from each station for a QSO
to be valid. If a serial number is not received, it is not a valid QSO.
Serial numbers should not be assumed to be 1 if the number is not sent.
Hell, with your log checking capability, we should put in a provision that
at least 3 stations must have a particular station in their logs for the QSO
to be valid in anyone's log. That is not out of the question and should be
5 or 10 logs. This will make the contest more "sprint like" and more of
what it was intended to be (I believe).
*** This will eliminate FOC and bogus DX QSO's that we both know occur in
every Sprint!
73
---
Bill Fisher, KM9P
Concentric Systems, Inc. (CSI)
404-442-5821 Fax 404-667-1975
>From Kurszewski Chad" <kurszewski_chad at macmail1.csg.mot.com Wed Sep 14 16:47:49 1994
From: Kurszewski Chad" <kurszewski_chad at macmail1.csg.mot.com (Kurszewski Chad)
Date: 14 Sep 1994 15:47:49 U
Subject: Questions on 80M Loop
Message-ID: <199409142048.AA00252 at pobox.mot.com>
Roger Hoeft aka KA9EKJ wrote:
> I recently installed an 80 meter loop such that the loop is up about 50 feet
> and roughly horizontal. In the brief time I have worked with the loop, I
> have noticed that reception on my roof-mounted HF6V is consistently about 2
> S units stronger (albeit noisier) than the loop.
> Should this be the case?
What you have constructed is known as a "Cloud Warmer". This antenna will only
be louder than the vertical if you are working the next COUNTY, not next
COUNTRY. With this low of an antenna (1/5th of a wavelength) and it being
mounted horizontially (in a plane parrallel with the ground), all of the signal
goes straight UP, and off into space (and some of it comes back down). For a
loop antenna, the signal max is perpendicular to the plane of the loop, hence,
straight up.
On the other hand, your vertical (although it is small/shortened in comparison)
directs it's signal toward the distant horizon. Therefore, for any
communication greater than about 100 miles, the vertical will out-perform the
cloud-warmer.
The only way the loop will outperform the vertical is if you make the loop's
plane perpendicular the the ground...this will direct the RF at the horizon,
perpendicular to the loop.
Save the cloud warmer for your local state QSO party!! (They work GREAT for
that!!!)
Chad WE9V
Member: Sultans of Shwing
Loud is Cool....yeah, heh, heh, heh, LOUD IS COOL!
Kurszewski_Chad at macmaiL1.csg.mot.com
>From oo7 at astro.as.utexas.edu (Derek Wills) Wed Sep 14 21:48:32 1994
From: oo7 at astro.as.utexas.edu (Derek Wills) (Derek Wills)
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 94 15:48:32 CDT
Subject: SPRINT MULTS
Message-ID: <9409142048.AA25648 at astro.as.utexas.edu>
I finally got one of the top multiplier-working stations to admit
that he doesn't get K****** CO2** NR 1 JOSE CUBA" sent to him.
He says "well, it is implied". [K5GA]
I think this happens in CQWW as well. When Baldur showed up as 5X5WR
in the middle of CQWW-cw (with a nice big split, very confusing...) he
gave 599s but "no contest". I heard some of the Big Guns calling and
working him, and chided them later for wasting valuable time on someone
who was not in the contest. The reply was "oh, it counts for Zone 37".
This doesn't sound right to me, either. However, I often hear people in
SS patiently asking someone "So, er, when were you first licensed?" "and
I guess I am your first contact in this, thing, huh?" - this is surely OK.
And while I'm at it, I have heard of certain SPRINT TEAMS meeting and
working each other back and forth in order to boost the Q totals!!
Personally, I'd doubt this. There seems little point in making skeds
during a Sprint! Unless a whole bunch of people agree to go off to
14001 and have their own little Sprint contest, and even then I don't
see that it would help - there are always people to work around 14040.
At the start of some CQWWs, there is a certain amount of Sprint-like
activity among some of the DXpeditioners for a few minutes on a few
bands, but I see nothing wrong with that. I think the people who win
the Sprints are just plain good ops, and it's sour grapes to suggest
that they are the best cheaters.
Derek AA5BT, G3NMX (a Sprint loser, but not sore)
oo7 at astro.as.utexas.edu
>From M Glenn Vinson Jr <mgvinson at crl.com> Wed Sep 14 21:46:12 1994
From: M Glenn Vinson Jr <mgvinson at crl.com> (M Glenn Vinson Jr)
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 13:46:12 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Networking WF1B RTTY software?
Message-ID: <Pine.3.87.9409141312.A15603-0100000 at crl.crl.com>
Does anyone have experience networking the WF1B RTTY software? Any
hints? CQWW RTTY is almost here and I would like to link 3 computers
in some simple fashion, in order to monitor the mult situation and score
constantly. Thanks.
Glenn, W6OTC
(mgvinson at crl.com)
More information about the CQ-Contest
mailing list