[CQ-Contest] ARRL "endorses" cut numbers

[Paul J. Piercey]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com 
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of 
> Dennis Younker NE6I
> Sent: June 6, 2007 04:41
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL "endorses" cut numbers
> 
> This brings up the point that when the rules say that a QSO 
> "number" will be sent, a cut number is apparently not 
> technically legal.
> 
> --Dennis, NE6I
> 

Although your point is valid, it is legal if it has been agreed to in
advance that cut numbers are acceptable and the precedent seems to have been
already set.

73 -- Paul VO1HE  


> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Pruett" <k8cc at comcast.net>
> Cc: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 8:20 PM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL "endorses" cut numbers
> 
> 
> >I would like to remind everyone that "using" cut numbers is 
> not the same
> > thing as "logging" cut numbers.
> >
> > I check the logs for the ARRL 10M contest, where DX 
> stations send RST &
> > serial numbers for their exchange.  If the station sends 
> you a number
> > with cut digits, it is *your* responsibility to turn those 
> into numeric
> > digits in your log.  QSO numbers containing alphabetic 
> digits will be
> > scored as non-valid (no penalties, but you lose the QSO).  This
> > direction was concurred to by the ARRL Contest Department.
> >
> > I'm sure someone will claim "but I just copied what was sent".  No
> > matter - the rules say a QSO *number* must be received and 
> logged, so it
> > is the entrant's responsibility to make the translation, not the log
> > checkers.  The entrant is the person present when the QSO 
> is made; if
> > there is any doubt as to what the number is, they are the 
> only ones who
> > can ask for a fill and remove all doubt.
> >
> > Again, it's not my intent to deter the use of cut numbers 
> (although I
> > personally will not), but I want to make it clear that the 
> log (at least
> > for ARRL 10M) must show actual numbers for the QSO to be valid.
> >
> > Dave/K8CC
> >
> >
> > Steve Harrison wrote:
> >> At 11:22 PM 6/4/2007 +0000, kr2q at optonline.net wrote:
> >>
> >>> Sorry...couldn't resist.
> >>>
> >>> See the section titled "Work the Experts" - this is an intro
> >>> for newbies who "can copy and send Morse code at 5 to 10 WPM."
> >>> http://www.arrl.org/news/features/2003/10/21/1/
> >>>
> >>
> >> Oh, brother..... I really didn't need to read that  ;o(((((((
> >>
> >> It's been several decades since I did a SS and maybe 
> things have sorta
> >> "evolved" in the meantime......  So I haven't the vaguest 
> idea whether, 
> >> for
> >> example, during the 2006 SS, A was often used by the 
> faster ops for 1.
> >>
> >>
> >>> Even QRPers get it.
> >>> See "The 'Secret' Language of the Exchange"
> >>> http://www.arrl.org/news/features/2002/10/21/1/
> >>>
> >>
> >> I can see that, considering the QRPers are a pretty 
> tight-knit and close
> >> group. When I was doing high-speed meteor scatter, we also 
> had a few
> >> shortcuts we'd sometimes take that could completely 
> bamboozle a newbie.
> >>
> >> Steve, K0XP
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
>