[CQ-Contest] Log question

[Charles Morrison]

> Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 11:47:33 -0700
> From: Tree <tree at kkn.net>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Log question
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Message-ID: <20080711184733.GA19296 at kkn.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> 
> I can answer this for the contests I check (SS, sprints, Stew, CQ160):
> 
> In the first case - the call should be identified as a busted call when
> doing the cross check from the W7AA log into the W7BB log.  Where it
excepted
> to find W7AA - it finds W7AAA around the same time.  It will count this as
> a verified QSO for W7AA and a busted call for W7BB.
> 
> If the second step happens - W7AA will have a dupe in his log - and the
QSO
> won't be checked.  In W7BB's log - the QSO will count.  It isn't a dupe
> and it matches up to W7AA's log.
> 
> If W7AA removed the dupe QSO, then W7BB would likely end up with a NIL.
> 
> Sometimes - the first QSO doesn't appear in one of the logs.  In this
case,
> the program will try to match up the second QSOs and count the first one
> as the dupe.
> 
> Tree N6TR
> tree at kkn.net

An excellent, plain English, question and answer that proves that all
stations SHOULD work Dupes.  Thanks for the answer Tree.  I hope that this
gets through, since there still seems to be some B4 messages sent in DX
contests.  Received one for an apparently busted call this weekend in IARU,
as compared to NAQP which I rarely, if ever, receive one.

Charlie
KI5XP