[CQ-Contest] AA4LR SS Phone LCR Comments

[Bill Coleman]

I was just looking at my log check report for the Sweepstakes Phone 
contest. This was one of my better low-power efforts.

First, I'd like to say I received a 3.1% error rate, which is rather 
consistent with previous efforts. In fact, based on previous efforts, I 
usually plan for 3% errors.

Next, out of 754 raw QSOs, I busted eight calls. This makes me sorta 
mad. Here's why -- based on a strong suggestion from the late W4AN, I 
ALWAYS read back the callsign of the station I worked. For every single 
contact, I repeated their callsign phonetically. So, a little more than 
1% of the time, this erroneous readback was not corrected by the other 
station.

Now, it could be that the other station did try to correct my error, 
and perhaps he was too weak or there was too much QRM for me to dig out 
the correction. But I suspect many didn't bother. It's particularly bad 
because each busted call costs an extra penalty QSO. Ouch.

Third, I lost 10 QSOs due to exchange errors. Seven of these were 
errors in the check. One was an error in the precedence. Two were 
errors in the section (NTX for STX and SJV for SCV). This suggests to 
me that we need to take special care to verify checks.

Forth, I had 5 QSOs lost because the numbers were wrong. Two of these 
were an incorrect digit. Two were a missing digit (eg 25 instead of 
225). And, for some reason, I was NIL in the log of N5RZ. Very likely 
he worked someone else when I called him and I missed it. That happens.

I find it intriguing that there were nearly twice as many errors in the 
check as in the number.

Fifth, I'm very surprised that the LCR doesn't show me the contacts 
busted by others. I believe it used to. Even though this does not 
affect my score, knowing what elements other people tend to bust helps 
me to be a better operator.



Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL        Mail: aa4lr at arrl.net
Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!"
             -- Wilbur Wright, 1901