[CQ-Contest] CQ WW SSB. Mathematics

[N2TK, Tony]

Hi Tonno,
Well there is one real problem by not repeating the entire call. You may be
coming back to K1IK instead of N1IK. With your partial report no one knows
for sure whom you have logged. You may be 100% sure, but N1IK may not b e
100% sure.
This has happened to me in pileups with K2TK. If I don't hear my entire call
I assume I am not in the log.

When I operate from DX locations I always give the entire call of the
station I am working. If the other station doesn't conform then he/she is
not in the log. Maybe it's not the quickest way to operate, but I feel it
helps reduce broken calls or Not In the Log calls.

N2TK, Tony



-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com]On Behalf Of Tonno Vahk
Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 2:04 AM
To: cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW SSB. Mathematics

I don't quite agree that you should always demand for you call repetition.

For example:
TEST ES5TV
N1IK
IK 5NN A5
N1IK 5NN 5
TU

In that case I clearly say that I have got your call and I am sure abt it.
Why would you question me? It is exactly the same way I trust you when you
answer my CQ and do not say my call, I trust you have got it correct. I do
not demand you to repeat my call, do I?

Actually I find it more beneficial in SSB not repeating the full calls all
the time when I am 100% sure, especially with 6 digit EU calls and they very
rarely ask for confirmation.

73
tonno
es5tv


----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lambert" <n1ik at n1ik.com>
To: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: 3. august 2005. a. 4:08
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW SSB. Mathematics


> You are exactly right, Al.
>
> I am relatively new to this sport, but when the DX station doesn't repeat
> my
> call properly, and calls QRZ, I will stay on frequency and hammer him/her
> unil I hear my call properly.  Sometimes this take N tries as the rate
> hounds will try to brush you off.  But I stick with it.  I need to hear my
> call come back, cleanly, before I will move on.
>
> I am always amazed at how some stations are willing to suffer UBN's for
> high
> rate.
>
> Best 73,
>
> Brian, N1IK
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Alfred J. Frugoli
> (KE1FO)
> Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 7:12 AM
> To: Lance
> Cc: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW SSB. Mathematics
>
> You should be penalized because you didn't verify that they had your call
> correctly.  Typo's into the log will never work out right with the penalty
> rule, but the idea is that each contact is an accurate *2 way* exchange of
> information.  You have 2 responsibilities during the exchange - that you
> copy his info correctly, and you make sure he copies your info correctly.
>
> 73 de Al, KE1FO
>
> Lance wrote:
>
>>Amen!  I've been penalized because "they" entered NW0L or KN0L, etc!
>>I got their calls correctly, why should I be penalized for their
> mistake(s)?
>>
>>73, WN0L
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: <K3BU at aol.com>
>>To: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
>>Sent: Monday, August 01, 2005 8:39 AM
>>Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW SSB. Mathematics
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>In a message dated 8/1/2005 7:38:25 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
>>>
>>>
>>k9gx at n4gn.com
>>
>>
>>>writes:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>Fortunately beyond just making the Qs one must copy and log calls
>>>>>and
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>exchanges correctly.<<
>>>
>>>...and pray that other people log YOU correctly, don't delete you from
>>>
>>>
>>their
>>
>>
>>>log (M/S "timing thing"), they don't press wrong key or computer
>>>doesn't
>>>
>>>
>>wipe
>>
>>
>>>bunch of QSOs or you will be punished with 4 QSO's removal "to punish
>>>you
>>>
>>>
>>for
>>
>>
>>>sloppy logging and teach you a lesson how to log properly".
>>>Isn't it time to remove this 3 QSO "penalty" stuff?
>>>It was meant to punish those who left the dupes in their old paper
>>>logs,
>>>
>>>
>>when
>>
>>
>>>you had the control over duping and it was justified then, but now?
>>>
>>>73 Yuri
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>CQ-Contest mailing list
>>>CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>>>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>CQ-Contest mailing list
>>CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 73 de Al, KE1FO
> www.ke1fo.info
>
> --
>
> Reclaim Your Inbox!
> http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest