[CQ-Contest] HG1S

Gilmer, Mike mgilmer at gnlp.com
Fri Oct 6 09:18:54 EDT 2000


Your info is correct, but incomplete: The ARRL SSB results are just now out
- and they were disqualified again.

HG1S is four-for-four (or is that oh-for-four?) for the 1999/2000 big DX

The ARRL says nothing about their reasons for the DQ.  CQ says HG1S had
multiple transmit signals and time changes (rubber clocking, I presume). 

>From a philosophical point of view, one can only imagine HG1S's motivations.


> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Timo [SMTP:timo.klimoff at kolumbus.fi]
> Sent:	Friday, October 06, 2000 4:22 AM
> To:	CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> Subject:	Vl: [CQ-Contest] RE HG1S in WPX CW 2000
> ----- Alkuperäinen viesti ----- 
> Lähettäjä: Felber Gyula <mttosz.vrk at mail.matav.hu>
> Vastaanottaja: <CQ-Contest at contesting.com>
> Lähetetty: 20. kesäkuuta 2000 10:25
> Aihe: [CQ-Contest] RE HG1S in WPX CW 2000
> > Our claimed score is often reduced by the log-checkers but not in a
> greater
> > extent than that of any of the same class and unlike yours, our team has
> > never been disqualified from any contest. We do consider the log
> accuracy an
> > important factor and as you can see and calculate yourself, the
> difference
> > between our claimed and approved score is getting smaller and smaller.
> In
> > this matter you might have some room to improve, too.
> > 
> > Gyula HA1TJ
> > chief operator
> > on behalf of the HG1S team
> > 
> I just browsed thru my old emails and this is from the 22nd of June 2000.
> I see, let's look at few recent results:
> if I have not got wrong information HG1S in disqualified in ARRL CW and
> CQWW SSB&CW contests 1999.
> Can anyone explain why?
> What this the reason?
> How anyone could do this just to get 50USD plaque?
> 73 Timo OH1NOA

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

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list