[CQ-Contest] Five DQ's Mark 2008 CQ WW SSB

Mike McCarthy, W1NR lists at w1nr.net
Tue Jul 28 05:17:11 PDT 2009

There is no excuse for deliberately altering the log times. That is
cheating pure and simple. As I read the rules, had the logs been
submitted as is, they would have just been reclassified to M/M without
penalty. The rules are the rules. If you can't live with them then don't

Mike, W1NR

Davor Kucelin wrote:
> Dear Dave and others,
> There is probably some misunderstanding. One part is missing on
> radiospot.net.
> On 6400 qsos we had 12qsos under violation of max 2-3min. I checked log my
> self and found those violations. Nobody of you tought that 12 qsos on 6400
> can be human mistakes caused by many factors (sleepnes,hurry,software.)
> Those 12 qsos are not rare mults but also some big M/M stns that can be work
> over the whole contest. If I deleted those qsos it would cause NIL to
> others.
> The right way was claiming Multi-Multi but I assumed those qsos would just
> be flaged and not counted for the score. There are still some logs with this
> errors that passed trough ubn procedure, some even dont have 0/1 for which
> stn did the qso. I agree something has to be done, expecaly in the SOABHP
> cat, lets wait for wwcw results.
> What procedure should we do if during a 48h contest we make some mistakes
> In waiting 10min? Do we really have to be M/M or can we just somehow remove
> qsos without hitting others???
> 73 Dave 9A1UN
> P.S Still love this game
> AB7E wrote: 
> The responses from those who were DQ'd offer interesting insight into their 
> attitudes toward cheating.  These folks admit intentionally and blatantly 
> violating an important contest rule, thereby attempting to gain an unfair 
> advantage over more honest competitors, and yet they feel disqualification
> was 
> an "over-reaction".  That would be like me robbing a bank and expecting my 
> penalty if I got caught to be merely having to return the money.  And these
> are 
> people from the upper echelon of the sport!
> For what it may be worth, one of those same stations clearly and explicitly 
> asked me to spot them on the cluster when I worked them in the 2009 CQ WPX
> CW 
> contest (yes, I reported it), so I'm not inclined to put much credence into 
> sympathetic excuses about isolated errors in judgment.
> Dave   AB7E
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list