[CQ-Contest] unique contacts and logging errors

[Leigh S. Jones]

Unique contacts may be rare to some operators, but
through the decades of contesting there have been
numerous occasions when I've worked dozens, even
hundreds of unique contacts in a row.

Back in the 70's my friends and I had a name for this
sort of contact.  We called them spoonfed contests.
Phrases like "even if you're not in the contest" were
dropped into our CQ's, and we'd even call CQ with
descriptions of the contest exchange.

One year when I was disappointed that 10 meters
wasn't producing in the phone SS due to declining
sunspots, I went up to 40 meters -- my favorite
band outside of contests in those days.  There I
sat in the middle of the day spoonfeeding contacts.
Of course, if you do your contests from the NE,
you won't be surprised by this.  I came in second
in the high power class that year on the strength
of about 150 spoonfed contacts -- nearly all were
QSO number 1.

----- Original Message -----
From: "mike l dormann" <w7dra at juno.com>
To: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, September 01, 2003 5:05 AM
Subject: [CQ-Contest] unique contacts and logging errors


> 1) unique contacts
> i find throwing out unique contacts not a good thing, I'm sure all
of us
> hard core contest types have done an Oceania dx contest as 3D2/W7DRA
or
> some other dx venture and found guys coming out of the woodwork to
> contact us
>
> maybe we need to commit to particular contest with a email statement
to
> the contest director saying "yes W6XXX plans to work your contest,
so
> count no matter how many of his contacts are shown in the
contestants
> logs" and therefore unique contacts do not subtract from the score.
>
> talk about a can of worms
>
> i bet about in about 1/2 the contests that i participate in, i get
no
> contacts at all because i was not able to contact a single station
>
>
> logging errors
> to me contests are kind of like American voting, you check to see if
> there is any obvious cheating, showing that the contestant's log
probably
> has an error rate of less than 5%, and go on to the next
contestant's
> log.
>
> we have a new contest when accuracy becomes king, it is almost like
a
> change in the unwritten rules
>
> last CQWW my score was cut in half by errors in my log, makes me
less
> excited to work a guy that comes out of the mud for about 30
seconds,
> grab him to never hear him again, "was that a U or V?" i made 4
logging
> errors to cause this score reduction (SOSB80LP from pac nw)
>
> one obvious solution" eliminate ALL computers from EVERY facet of
ham
> contesting, for that matter eliminate all transieve functions and
require
> manual VFOs, do not allow pencils, only ball paint pens for logging,
and
> all logs to be in Latin.
>
> mike,  soon to be SOSB160LP in the CQWW and if you try to work me be
sure
> to be LOUD and send SLOWLY
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>     The world's top contesters battle it out in Finland!
> THE OFFICIAL FILM of WRTC 2002 now on professional DVD and VHS!
>        http://home1.pacific.net.sg/~jamesb/
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest