[CQ-Contest] QSO B4... NO YOU DIDN'T!

[Leon Kanopka]

Hello:

I have a question about working dupes.  I looked up a couple of 
major contests and the rules that apply to them.  I sure most of 
you know them already, but I put them here for clarity.  These rules 
are copied from the 1998 rules as copied from the LA9HW contest 
calendar:

CQ World Wide DX Contest Rules:

    10.Duplicate contacts and broken calls penalty: up to 3% - 
    three (3) additional contacts removed; over 3 % is grounds for 
    possible  disqualification.

ARRL Contest Rules:

    Excess duplicates and call sign/exchange errors. See Contest 
    Disqualification Criteria in the Contest Yearbook for complete 
    details.  

North American QSO Party Rules:

    ...for each QSO for which you are not in the other stations log, 
    you lose that QSO plus an additional one contact; and for each 
    QSO for which the log data is incorrectly copied in any respect, 
    you lose that contact. Entries with score reductions greater 
    than 5 % will be disqualified.


These incorrect call/bad logging penalties are becoming more 
common (it is about time, IMHO).  If you have a broken call in your 
log (for whatever reason), and as a result you call the station again, 
would it not be best if that station told you that you worked before 
at whatever time or contact # xyz?  Now you can correct your log 
and it will not have a busted call in it.  Why should working the call 
a second time and logging it as a dupe correct this error for 
anyone?  It seems to me that a contester should want to fix an 
error in their log (during the contest!), so an obvious problem like a 
QSO B4 presents a perfect opportunity to do this.

I do still tell a dupe that calls me that he/she is a dupe, and I give 
them the time or SN of the previous contact.  After all, the 
computer puts the necessary information on the screen right in 
front of me.  If the other party is interested in correcting the error, i'll 
work with him on it for the brief time it takes.  If I lose another QSO 
because of this, so be it - I would rather have a correct entry in the 
log.  After all, there is no guarantee that the reason someone 
shows up as a dupe in your log is that he/she got your call wrong, 
you may have miscopied a call yourself.

Just my 2 cents.

73
Leon

On 10 Dec 98, at 15:30, John T. Laney, III wrote:

> 
> Here is my dupe experience at 8P9Z this year CQWWCW.  6560 non dupe
> QSOs, 162 dupes.  Call signed every QSO (almost).  Every QSOs except
> tail enders like ZW5B mentioned in his write up and a few USA pile ups
> late in the contest where like Randy I tried to sign every other QSO or
> so.  I suspect the % of dupes is directly related to the infrequency of
> signing the call of the running station and would think that the % that I
> and others like CN8WW encountered make this almost a non-problem. Just
> work them again, log them, and forget it.    NOW, why the dupeing station
> wants separate QSLs for each duped QSO is another question.  73, John,
> K4BAI/8P9HT, opr 8P9Z in CQWW.  BTW, look for K3KG and K4FJ as 8P9Z in
> ARRL 10 M test this weekend and QSL via K4BAI.
> 
> --
> CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
> Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com
> 


--
Leon
home: ni2p at panix.com
        NEW ADDRESS FOR THE NORTH AMERICAN RAILROAD TERMINAL PAGES:
                      http://www.railterminal.com/
including the The North American Tourist Railroad and Railroad Museum List

--
CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com