[CQ-Contest] SMC "Mini-Sprint" practice

[KI9A at aol.com]

While paging thru my NCJ on CD last week, I noticed my club, SMC, used to run 
a fall "mini-sprint' practice contest in Sept & October.  Tonite, we gave it 
a shot at reviving it, & it worked kinda nice!  We did it on SSB ( since SSB 
sprint is coming up), from 0130Z-0200Z between 3825-3855.  I worked 30 Q's in 
that time frame.

We used the 'sprINT' rule, can work a dupe if you have at least 3 Q's since 
the last time you worked.  We had about 7 members get on this time, since we 
had little time to get it together.  LP or HP, no scoring, just get on & get 
into the rythym, & test equipment & antennas.

We may to CW  next Weds eve, 0130Z -0200Z between 3600-3650.  Just use the 
normal sprint exchange. All are welcome!

73/Chuck KI9A


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


>From K4OJ" <k4oj at tampabay.rr.com  Thu Sep 14 12:38:58 2000
From: K4OJ" <k4oj at tampabay.rr.com (K4OJ)
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 07:38:58 -0400
Subject: [CQ-Contest] ...the bottom line is VERY obvious
References: <G0VB3C$IBnLAHqkyj3eQAMh07FHS1hWNWPTU4WHJuj38 at iol.it>
Message-ID: <044901c01e40$5f5dd8e0$78c85c18 at tampabay.rr.com>


agreed...and I personally will double check some of the callers...especially
if it is a potential rare multiplier before they slip away...isn't this part
of what makes an experienced contester and olde sage as opposed to an olde
farte?

I4JMY was that 300 watts OM?  (guessing)

oj


----- Original Message -----
From: <i4jmy at iol.it>
To: <k8cc at mediaone.net>; <k4oj at tampabay.rr.com>; <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2000 4:18 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] ...the bottom line is VERY obvious


Just as an example, and without dealing with more complex items, the
number of US station that apparently send wrong CQ zone is large (i.e.
5 instead of 3, 4 instead of 5, and all the possible combinations).
My personal technique is to ask exchange confirmation when I've doubts
and to eventually explain (very easy on SSB) in case of mistake what
instead a correspondant should send.
Finally, this time will be also an investment to spare time in the
other bands where you'll have a QSO with that station.
Note that when I enter a contest is never just, but with the
determination to be competitive. Well, I don't feel "damaged" at all to
occasionally lower my rate to avoid beeing harderly penalized.
Obvious deductions are often VERY dangerous, expecially when you
suppose you got the prefix (call) correct and what is wrong is the
exchange. More than once I found, asking to confirm zone, that the call
I was sure about wasn't instead correct and more than once a new mult
came in.
With all the possible respect to own knowdlege, wise contester know not
to over or under evaluate anything lagging on his ability only.
Contesting is also precision and quality, not only speed and
approximation, this is why the heavy penalty trend give much more sense
to our competitions and drive us to enhance our station hardware and
own operative features.
The opposite would be boring.

73,
Mauri I4JMY



> ---------- Initial message -----------
>
> From    : owner-cq-contest at contesting.com
> To      : "K4OJ" <k4oj at tampabay.rr.com>, <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Cc      :
> Date    : Wed, 13 Sep 2000 20:21:03 -0400
> Subject : Re: [CQ-Contest] ...the bottom line is VERY obvious
>
>
> PEOPLE MUST SEND THE CORRECT STUFF!!!!!!!
>
> For example, a VE9 sending "NB" in SS is NOT SENDING THE CORRECT
> STUFF.  His exchange is a section, not his province.  If a KP4
station
> sends me 59908 in the IARU HF Championship, he's NOT SENDING THE
CORRECT STUFF.
>
> So what are you going to do?  If he's sending the wrong stuff, WHAT
ARE YOU
> GONNA LOG?  If you log the VE9 in NB you really should lose the QSO
because
> the rules clearly state that you're to copy a SECTION not a
PROVINCE.  If
> you get an erroneous zone (geez...that sounds interesting), the
logchecker
> will most likely disallow your QSO unless he has a log that
explicitly says
> otherwise.  Also, many logging programs won't allow you to log
invalid data.
>
> My personal technique is to COPY WHAT WAS SENT, but then apply my
> contester's smarts to it - that is, I CORRECT IT IF THE ERROR IS
> OBVIOUS.  I know some people will scream about this, but too bad.
Its the
> most likely way I'm going to get credit for a valid QSO, and its the
best
> for everyone involved.  If for some reason I'm wrong and I lose the
QSO,
> then I can live with that.
>





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