[CQ-Contest] Apr wpx and busted q

[Bob Wruble]

I agree with rich........I believe this fetish re log accuracy is
getting outa hand and acting as a possible deterrent to 
participation or at the very least log submission........its
a hobby right?      bob  w7gg


-----Original Message-----
From: KL7RA Fairbanks Alaska <kl7ra at icefog.gcgo.nasa.gov>
To: CQ-Contest at contesting.com <CQ-Contest at contesting.com>
Date: Wednesday, May 05, 1999 6:56 AM
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Apr wpx and busted q


>
>Some comments for the CQ WW/WPX Contest committee members:
>
>I just noticed the Dayton Hamvention is going to be in May through
>the year 2003. As I recall the main reason for not moving the WPX
>CW contest to April was the Hamvention would be moving back to the
>original date. 
>
>I would like to see the WPX CW moved back a month for a lot of
>selfish reasons other then the obvious better propagation on the
>double point 160/40 bands. For example, last weekend it snowed here
>at my QTH from Friday afternoon until Monday. The temperature was
>in the low 20's making it a perfect weekend for being inside and
>hunched over a wireless. The first real nice days after a long
>winter are near the end of May and I'm usually in the lower 48 for
>Dayton anyway.
>
>I'm sure the participation would go up as I have heard others
>mention this as well. Oh, sure the Florida QSO Party would have to
>switch to the next month. But its 100+ in Florida in April and 100+
>in May with similar stateside radio conditions so I don't see any
>problem for those guys. 
>
>I think deleting three qso's for a busted call is too much. This
>may have been the right thing to do at some point in time. Now with
>the logs going into cyberspace and many busted calls detectable,
>losing the qso should be good enough. Everyone got the message to
>get the call correct and you can tell by the many requests for
>repeats in the contests. 
>
>I was in the top 10 single band 20 WWCW listing last year and all
>of the scores were reduced from their high claimed, but the order
>stayed the same. This indicates to me that all of us were running
>about the same error rate, somewhat, and that the fellow that won
>did the best job in the contest. 
>
>I worry that a new counter-measure is starting to emerge where
>people feel it necessary to record the contest and "fix" calls. The
>three qso penalty is a driving force now that the busted calls are
>be "caught". The "golden log" idea isn't helping as well. 
>
>It would be nice to keep contesting fun and I think most contesters
>would drop this recording nonsense if they thought the work
>required exceeded any benefit.
>
>Just some ideas on a cold and windy night.
>
>Rich  KL7RA    Dayton next week, I hope it isn't too warm there.
>
>   
>
>
>--
>CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
>Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com
>


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