Contest rules not in QST

N1MM at N1MM at
Sat Oct 14 23:04:54 EDT 1995

Hi Dick,

I've never worked at the League, but I have known quite a few people who do,
since I live in the Hartford, CT area.  The folks that do work there are by
no means perfect, but they do love the hobby, and as you said in your email,
are very supportive of contesting.

It is frustrating to me to see people on the CQ-Reflector constantly bash the
League people without any attempt to get the facts.  I think it's sad that
emails like yours are so rarely seen.  I'm sure those at the ARRL who were
trying to improve things and got bashed, appreciate your taking public notice
of what they were REALLY trying to do.  I know I do.

Tom, N1MM

P.S. Please do not remail this.  I'd rather not get bashed by the flamers.

>From De Syam <syam at>  Sun Oct 15 02:52:53 1995
From: De Syam <syam at> (De Syam)
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 1995 21:52:53 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: No more printed contest rules in QST?
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.951014215102.5739B-100000 at>

On Thu, 12 Oct 1995, Jim Hollenback wrote:

> On Oct 12, 10:56am, Lau, Zack,  KH6CP wrote:
> > Subject: RE: No more printed contest rules in QST?
> >
> > My understanding was that newcomers could read "user friendly"
> > explanations of how to operate the contest.  See the October 1995
> > QST for an example, page 125.
> >
> > Of course, the BOOK will be a necessity for serious competitors
> > who have invested $$$ into their competitive stations.
> >
> > Personally, I think this makes sense.  Why subject newcomers to
> > the detailed fine print?  Most beginners just want enough information
> > to participate without sounding like a lid.  I think this will result in
> > more
> > participation.
> >
> How much you want to bet that the book of rules will not be a very
> hot item in the ARRL book store? Bet most will operate the contest
> from memory, or old copies of QST, or the beginers guide to the contest.
> 73, Jim, WA6SDM
> jholly at
--And the contest desk will be kept busy adjusting logs submitted with 
the old rules in mind to the new rules--

                                   Very 73,

                                Fred Laun, K3ZO 

>From Jerry Sidorov" <jerry at  Sat Oct 14 22:00:57 1995
From: Jerry Sidorov" <jerry at (Jerry Sidorov)
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 95 01:00:57 +0400
Subject: Updated 1995 CQWW rules wanted.
Message-ID: <AB9K2WmKn0 at>

Hi fellow contesters,

could you, please, send me directly an updated 1995 CQWW rules?
Thanks in advance.

        73,  Jerry  UA9AR.

Mail: Jerry Sidorov, P/O Box 9411,  *   E-mail:  jerry at
      Chelyabinsk, 454080, Russia   *

>From ni6t at (Garry Shapiro )  Sun Oct 15 10:22:59 1995
From: ni6t at (Garry Shapiro ) (Garry Shapiro )
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 1995 02:22:59 -0700
Subject: CQP: Siskiyou County
Message-ID: <199510150922.CAA25812 at>

This is multipart MIME message.

Content-Type:text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; name="NCZ0317.TMP"

Attachment is reply to KG6LF

Content-Type:text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; name="00001335.msg"

From: ni6t at (Garry Shapiro )
Subject: Re: CQP: Siskiyou County
To:  joe.ham at (Joe Ham)
You wrote: 
>Even if Ray hasn't done all those things, and even if it snows, I bet
>you still set a county record.  Have a good time.  We'll be running Co
>Co County low power and still try to set a record.
I just got back from Oregon, where I caught NO steelhead; however, my 
friends and I were broken into and ripped off on the Rogue River by 
some junkie scumbag.

I left for Siskiyou around 7:30PM Friday night. I got as far as Los 
Gatos before realizing that I had no money; my wife brought some down 
the hill to me. I got on the Interstate at about 8PM and arrived at 
K6VX--380 miles away--5.25 hours later. That's a 70 mph average 
including a pit stop. I have done it faster and would have gone faster 
but had not had time to get a wheel balance and had a shimmy at 95 mph. 
Should not be telling this to a police chief, I suppose.

Ray got me up after 3 hours' sleep and we configured his station for 
the contest, including rewiring his coaxial relays (he normally just 
uses a footswitch). Got a good start but, as usual, stayed on a band or 
mode too long and bandswitching was tedious. 

Ray did get the 40m 3el up--at 160 feet--although it was not rotating. 
We pointed it at 70 degrees and left it there. Not being accustomed to 
such a cannon, I probably started too late on 40--around 0045Z--as 
evidenced by a Conway-size pileup that drove the rate meter into the 
high 200's. That session garnered 307 Q's in 2.2 hours. Awesome. 

Ray had had a lot of storm damage and a cuppla spreaders on his quad 
were flapping in the breeze. I only had 3 Q's on 160--late getting 
there, and might have taken my 6 hours off too early, but the 80m rate 
was dropping quickly at the time. Last year I did better on 80/160 and 
much worse on 40.

One bad dream that came true was being overhauled by Peter, AB6WM, who 
wound up with 48 more Q's, but I had more on CW and almost caught him. 
I had 693 CW out or of 1553 Q's--a pretty good ratio.

The southern boys--AB6FO, AC6T, KC6X--and W1FEA/6 and W6REC from the 
North dominated. I guess my 220.3K is worth Top Ten and a new record 
for Siskiyou--breaking last year's. Had a great time, despite little 
sleep. Maybe next year I will be smarter. Responsibilities at home 
prevented strategy planning before going.

You had a FB low power score--looks like a second or third place 
finish. Congrats!

Garry, NI6T


>From ni6t at (Garry Shapiro )  Sun Oct 15 10:52:52 1995
From: ni6t at (Garry Shapiro ) (Garry Shapiro )
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 1995 02:52:52 -0700
Subject: Contest exchange?
Message-ID: <199510150952.CAA18506 at>

You wrote: 
>How much do you send when correcting an incomplete or busted call?
>On CW, my relatively recent practice has been:
>Him: K1ABC
>Me:  K2ABC 5NN3 (or whatever)
>Him: K1ABC K1ABC 5NN5
>Me:  K1 TU AA6MC
>or on SSB:
>Him: (garble) ABC
>Me:  ending ABC, 59 3
>Him: K1ABC 59 5
>Me:  K1, thanks, QRZ?
>I'd like to survey the forum community's practice in this area.  I 
have in the
>past tended to use the CT AUTOCORRECT feature which will resend the 
entire call
>on CW, but recently in an attempt to speed things up I've started to 
>send just the part I got wrong, prefix or suffix.  But a contester who 
>greatly respect discouraged this practice, in essence saying that I 
>completed the required exchange.  Another contester I greatly respect
>abbreviates this even further, as:
>Me: (garble) ABC
>Me:  ABC, 59 3
>Him: K1ABC 59 5
>Me:  AA6MC
>What do you say?  Please send your opinion to me, I'll tabulate the 
votes and
>share the summarized results.
>Dick Dievendorff, AA6MC
It's just like a DX pileup, Dick: if the guy does not hear his full 
callsign, he cannot be sure you have it. Send the full callsign.

All these cutesy ways of saving a second seem to have a price; in this 
case, you save a fraction of a second, and he goes away wondering if he 
was logged.

My own nemesis is those stations who send fully abbreviated numerical 
exchanges--at 50 wpm, e.g. ATNN for 1099. Trips me up EVERY time.

Garry, NI6T

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list