[CQ-Contest] The dupes?

[David Gilbert]

Jukka, as I mentioned to you in a private email, the problem is that in 
perhaps 90% of the cases the other station will simply depart the 
frequency as soon as you send QSO B4 and pause for a reply. Most will 
suspect that you are correct until they have time to check their own log 
for an error, and the chances of them coming back later to argue with 
you if they can't find one are very slim.

If you actually worked someone else and typed the callsign wrong in your 
log you will get a NIL or busted call penalty unless you work him again. 
If the other party typed your callsign incorrectly (or didn't log the 
earlier contact because he wasn't sure about it) and you don't work him 
for a dupe, you still risk the chance of getting a NIL, although the 
other guy might get a busted call penalty instead .,.. it all depends 
upon how badly he mangled your callsign.

I still don't understand how you in any way risk a penalty for yourself 
by simply working the dupe. It's faster and safer than any other course 
of action. And I can think of more than one way you needlessly risk a 
penalty by not working him again. It would be courteous to inform him of 
the potential dupe so he can check for a busted callsign earlier in his 
log, but it seems to me that you should still simply work him right away 
and move on (i.e., you send "QSO B4 599 14").

73,
Dave AB7E


Jukka Klemola wrote:
> All,
> as there has been also others replying I am not behaving correctly ..
>  
> I am puzzled.
>  
> My justification for saying QSO B4 is that I have the station call in my
> log.
>  
> The station calling me for a second time is either of the two:
> 1.	paper log without updated dupesheet
> 2.	computer log that I am not in
>  
> The first is that I accept and understand.
>  
> But the second is something that needs a review.
> So I have the station’s call in my log but he does not have my call in
> his log.
>  
> My interpretation has been the first QSO is an error in his log or a
> potential NIL for me.
>  
> So, I initiate discussion of the line in my log whether it is something
> I need to work on or we both need to work on.
>  
>  
> For Jim especially .. have you considered you have logged a bad call and
> when the other wants to discuss about it during the contest and on the
> band/mode in question, you discard the initiative?
>  
>  
> Or how do you see this?
>  
>  
> 73
> jukka OH6LI
>  
>  
>  
>  
> -----Alkuperäinen viesti-----
> Lähettäjä: Jim Rhodes [mailto:k0xu at longlines.com] 
> …
> When someone tells me "QSO B4" I just spin the dial and let them get the
> NIL in their log. Maybe some day they will learn. No skin off me & they
> get any penalty. Takes too long to argue, I might miss 2 or 3 more Q's
> by taking the time to make someone admit they might be in error. But
> hey, it's your log and your score.
>
> At 07:51 AM 12/10/2008, Jukka Klemola wrote:
> …
> Ward's letter tells to log them.
>  
> I do not.
> Instead I tell the other station QSO B4.
> In case of a disagreement, I agree with the station that I remove the
> 1st QSO and the QSO we will log is the one I leave in the log.
>  
> …
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>