[CQ-Contest] Work 'Em Dupes...

[Jimmy D. Roller]

I have been following comments regarding working or not working dupes
lately on the reflector with great interest. I have to admit to being
guilty as charged. Being somewhat nasty-neat and fastidious in dealing
with paperwork of all kinds, I generally have used the "QSO B4" phrase
with great regularity even though I suspected it was probably quicker
and less disruptive to your rythm to go ahead and work the dupes as they
occur. I just don't like a cluttered log. So...after reading the
discussion and comments, I decided to conduct an experiment. This past
weekend in the CW 160 meter contest I disabled the dupe check when
calling CQ in my logging program and let 'er rip. To get a good feel for
what was going on, I tried to call CQ as much as possible. Please note
that I do not consider myself a Big Gun contester, but I do fairly well
most of the time relative to effort expended and modest rig/antenna
constraints.

In the contest, I made 606 QSOs in a less than full time effort. Out of
those 606 Qs, 28 were duplicate contacts for a percentage of 4.6
percent. I'm used to having at most 1 or 2 dupes in my log at the end,
so I was somewhat bent out of shape due to my preference for neat
paperwork. After analyzing the logs and the dupe calls, two things
grabbed my attention. 1) One poor misguided soul in a neighboring state
answered my CQ and was worked *four* times. If this isn't a record, it's
a darned good average! 2) Several calls on the dupe list belonged to
what I consider to be contest veterans that I have worked many times
over the years. This group ought to know better, but obviously do not or
don't care!

Conclusions? You guys have convinced me; even though it goes against the
grain for me personally, I plan to work the dupes as they come in future
contests. The other more important thought, though, is that when you are
in the S&P mode, you have a responsibility to check for a previous QSO
before you call. I try my best to avoid calling a second time when I S&P
and I would expect you to do the same. It's common courtesy, if nothing
else. Why waste the time of the running station and your own operating
time by making duplicate QSOs? Come on guys, at least make an effort. If
we all did that, the dupe percentage would drop dramatically for all of
us and the question of logging or not logging dupes becomes moot.

Vy 73 and good contesting,

Jim, N4IR


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