[CQ-Contest] Not reading UBN reports

[Tree]

> Here's another example:
> 
> I call CQ and get an answer.  The caller sends his call wrong, and I call
> what he sent.  If he doesn't correct it, who gets dinged?  I think I do,
> even though I didn't make the mistake.
> 
> That's one of the reasons I stopped reading UBN reports.

Well, sh** does happen.  However, it tends to happen to everyone about 
the same rate.  Yes - any specific data point may be wrong, but the 
trends aren't.

If you are seeing error rates in the CQ WW or SS that are under 1 or 2 
percent, then you can feel comfortable about your accuracy.  The best 
operators routinely achieve those error rates - even with the occasional 
situation where someone else makes the mistake.

However, if you see error rates in the 5 percent or larger category, you 
probably could improve your score significantly by putting a bit more 
emphasis on accuracy.  

Since the UBNs are showing you how your final score is calculated, it 
seems that it would be important to hear what they are trying to tell you.

I am all ears if anyone thinks there is a more fair way to deal with 
situations where the sending station makes the mistake.  The one concept
that is used in a few contests is to bust the QSO on both sides when an 
error occurs - but I don't believe the majority of contesters are really
excited by that rule.

The goal of the UBNs and log checking in general is to make sure the 
right person wins - not to compute the most possible accurate score.

Contesing would suffer greatly if sloppy operators were allowed to take
advantage of their errors by having more QSOs and more interesting 
multipliers.  When you bust callsigns, you are less likely to have dupes
and if you bust a prefix, you are more likely to invent new multipliers
that other stations can't work.

The occasional "blown whistle" is just the price we all have to pay for 
this.  

73 Tree N6TR
tree at kkn.net