[CQ-Contest] Re: Logging Dupes

[Barry]

Another few comments on dupes:

If you don't sign your call after every QSO, you're going to get 
duped more than if you do. 
Sequence from 10m contest:
Him: W3XYZ 5991234
W3XYZ: TU 599PA
Him: TU
Me: W2UP
Him: W2UP 5991235
Me: UR CL?
Him: (call given)
Me: 599PA (or would B4 be better in this case?)

Second related item - I've gotten QSLs from guys who duped me, 
and they include both QSOs on same card! Explain that one to 
me...

73,
Barry

On 19 Dec 01, at 22:26, Tonno Vahk wrote:

> 
> I guess nobody has brought that out:
> 
> My feeling is that there are stations who dupe some multipliers
> deliberately in the second half of the contest when the rates are slow
> to make sure that they are in the log.
> 
> In CQWW CW, I remember that we had quite nice US pile-ups on 40m and
> 20m at ES9C in the last hours of the contest and in times more than
> half of the QSOs were dupes. It was really funny. And most of them
> were 1x2 US calls probably quite seriously in the contest so we could
> copy each other very well and probably copied as well during the first
> QSO.
> 
> I really got myself thinking that they were probably hedging their
> risks and while scrolling the band at the end of the contest duped us
> to make sure they have the multiplier.
> 
> What do you think? Is it OK? It's not really carelessness but sober
> and calculated behaviour and thus you can't really blame them, can
> you?
> 
> BTW, while going through the log now I identified the record holder -
> UA9FMZ worked us 6 times on 20m! QSOs all nicely spread out on 48
> hours:)
> 
> 73
> Tonno
> ES5TV
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Scott Nichols" <snichols at mvosprey.com>
> To: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 7:09 PM
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Re: Logging Dupes
> 20
> 
> >
> > Guess I started something here...
> >
> > Thanks for the MANY replies I received in my inbox this morning,
> > especially the ones from people who actually got my point...To the
> > ones who missed the point, I will clarify...
> >
> > My original comments about dupes were aimed mainly at the many
> > stations (100+)  who called me during  busy runs last weekend BEFORE
> > checking their logs to see if we had already worked...They sometimes
> > even admitted to doing this while apologizing for doing it...Some
> > callers made an honest mistake...That happens...Some callers
> > probably busted my call earlier (or vise-versa)...That happens
> > too...Others were nothing but careless and wasted my time and QSO
> > points...Many op's jump in blindly when they hear a huge pileup...OK
> > for the S&P guys who aren't worried about the rhythm of a run or
> > rates...Not so great for those who are doing the
> > "running"...Mistakes happen, especially during large pileups...My
> > point was that many dupes could be avoided if a little more care was
> > taken by everyone...If any doubt exists, ask again to be sure of the
> > call or exchange...Check your log BEFORE calling a guy in the middle
> > of a run...I don't see the point of logging a dupe that both parties
> > agree is a dupe...Guess I wasn't as clear as I could have
> > been...Anyway, had fun in the contest and looking forward to the
> > next one as always...
> >
> > 73, Scott VE1OP
> >
> >
> > --
> > CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
> > Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com
> >
> 
> 
> --
> CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
> Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com
> 


--
Barry Kutner, W2UP              Internet: w2up at mindspring.com
Newtown, PA                     Frankford Radio Club
        


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