[CQ-Contest] Working Dupes

Scott Ellington sdelling at facstaff.wisc.edu
Wed Dec 15 10:16:40 EST 1999

We've beaten this issue to death before, but I'll offer an idea that just
occurred to me.

There really is a dilemma when you work a dupe, as there could be another bad
contact in your log.  It would be nice to find a way to resolve that
efficiently. Here's one suggestion:

HG1S:  cq test
K9MA:  k9ma
HG1S:  (dupe indicated)  QSO 1734Z 599 15
K9MA:  QSL 599 04  (notes time in log)

Now, if I find HG1H in my log at 1734Z, I'm pretty sure I busted the call.  If
I don't find anything resembling HG1S near that time, he probably thought I
was working him when I called someone else.  In either case, HG1S deletes the
earlier QSO.  If I really DID work HG1S before, we still both delete that QSO.
 (Perhaps I made a typo before I called him the second time, which I will have
to correct.)  I believe, assuming the second QSO is good, this resolves
everything, including the possibility of a bad QSO getting counted.  All it
took was 12 extra characters.

Most of this could be automated with minor changes to logging software.  Of
course, the procedure would have to be widely accepted to work.

Can anyone think of a more efficient way?

On a related topic, I'm finding more and more operators who withold the
exchange until the other station gets the call right.  That's great.  However,
there are still a lot of operators who repeat their call unnecessarily.  If
you repeat your call with your exchange, I assume you're not sure I got it
right, so I'll send it again.  That's a waste of time if you heard me send it
correctly the first time.


Scott  K9MA

Scott Ellington
Madison, Wisconsin   USA

sdelling at facstaff.wisc.edu

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

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list