[CQ-Contest] ...the bottom line is VERY obvious

[k8cc]

At 08:08 AM 9/15/00 -0400, Gilmer, Mike wrote:
>Let's face it, the log checking can only do so much (how many busted QSOs
>did it NOT catch?) and often is at the mercy of the quality of the senders'
>logs.  Some log checking tries to weed out the "unstable" logs - perhaps
>your example can be used to make the next revision(s) even better.
>
>In the meantime, your example is a case to remove points from the
>currently-presumed-*good* log as well as from the *bad* log.

You guys might be surprised what can be found in people's logs from the 
1999 ARRL 10M contest:

- A big EU multi with every sent exchange shown as "59 NONE" or "599 NONE"
- DX logs with 2000+ QSOs where the sent exchange is a CQ zone (should be a 
serial number).
- DX logs with NO sent serial number.
- Logs where the filename (i.e., callsign.log) is not the callsign used 
during the contest.
- The log indicates a particular state in the sent exchange, yet EVERY 
station logged him in another.

I can only speak for the ARRL 10/160 logchecking team, we take steps to try 
to catch these errors, most of which are inadvertent and perhaps arise from 
mistakes in the setup or use contest logging software.  (I highly suspect 
that other logchecking teams do so as well.)  These are pretty gross errors 
WHICH CAN BE EASILY CAUGHT BY THE CONTEST ENTRANT.  If people would do so, 
the logcheckers could spend their time more valuably.

The November 2000 QST is scheduled to have an article I wrote called 
"Coping With Cabrillo" which should help those unfamiliar with contest log 
files how to generate the correct file, and how to check it for errors 
prior to submittal.  This should help.

73,


Dave/K8CC


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