[CQ-Contest] WPX SN... broken suffixes

[DL8MBS]

kr2q at optimum.net wrote:

>about a "cut number - like" solution.  So if I'm sending SN 123 but the other guy 
>copied 112 and asks a CFM, I should be able to send something like RR3 or KK3 or something 
>so that he knows that he has the other stuff correct but that the last digit (in this case) is
>wrong.  Sending 1324 multiple times is a pain.  Sending RR2R would be much better (I think?).
>  
>
It sounds effective and elegant but I think it will fail in most cases 
due to the anticipation of the listener. Those habits and routines are 
so strong that even routined ops  have difficulties i.e. with cut 
numbers at unexpected places. I still silently (not maliciously) smile 
about a big gun sending "een-something" and completely failing three 
times with my slightly ironic reply "een 7e" in ARRL-Contest ;-)

As someone with a REALLY WEAK qrp-signal compared to Doug (my lowwires 
only have longings to become something like antennas some day) I wonder 
about the expectations of running stations how to best correct a 
miscopied suffix. My "MBS" provides a lot of opportunities and variants 
for this :-(
 In WPX I often replied with "DL8MBS MBS" (by paddle with slightly 
reduced speed) not knowing whether the omitting of the prefix helps or 
hurts. But my gut feeling says that it may not be too good to ignore the 
anticipation of the listener - like omitting 599 before repeating a 
miscopied serial number. It allows to tune in to a very weak signal 
while it doesn´t matter to loose one of the initial figures of the 599. 
Better than to loose an initial figure of the repeated serial. In the 
same sense I sometimes still start a call with "de DL8..." just to say 
"Hello, now comes a very weak signal..." allowing the listener to tune 
into the difference to most other signals he receives. Any opinions 
welcome.

Oh, and please all of you running stations: please don´t omit "test" at 
the end of the CQ as more than only a few did this weekend. It´s so bad 
to come on a frequency in a fine quick S&P-pass through the band only to 
hear a single call - which normally means "This is not the owner of the 
frequency to be called" - only to experience wasted moments later that 
he really IS the owner of the frequency to be called. Another example of 
time saving at the expense of  S&P-stations.

73, Chris

(www.dl8mbs.de)