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

[Dave - AB7E]

Agreed.  A friend of mine joined me for a M/S effort in the 2008 CQ WW CW contest, and our UBN report shows we were dinged for ten violations of the ten minute rule.  I checked our log carefully (which had NOT been altered) and found that only two of them were valid ... the rest clearly had ten minutes or more spacing.  That seems to be an ongoing unresolved problem with the scoring process that has been discussed here before, but the point is that we simply were penalized for the "violations" and our entry classification remained M/S.

73,
Dave   AB7E



------Original Mail------
From: "Stan Stockton" <k5go at cox.net>
To: "Davor Kucelin" <davor.kucelin at plavalaguna.hr>,
    <cq-contest at contesting.com>,
    <xdavid at 40cis-broadband.com>
Sent: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 09:05:52 -0500
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Five DQ's Mark 2008 CQ WW SSB

I am not a log checker but am interested in how this works.  I can only 
assume that if someone made 6400 contacts and by mistake had twelve 10 
minute rule violations the thing to do would be to submit the log as 
planned in the M/S category, appropriate deductions would be made 
(minor) and there would be no DQ.

If it were realized during the contest that these twelve violations 
occurred and those stations were then duped during legal times on the 
particular bands perhaps there would not even be a penalty.  I assume 
the problem is in changing the times to make it look like the contacts 
were legal which could cause someone to wonder whether there were 
hundreds of contacts that were altered by a minute or two.

If the log had not been altered, I would be amazed if there would have 
been anything other than a small, insignificant reduction in score.

Just an uneducated opinion on my part.

Stan, K5GO

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Davor Kucelin" <davor.kucelin at plavalaguna.hr>
To: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Cc: <xdavid at 40cis-broadband.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 3:38 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Five DQ's Mark 2008 CQ WW SSB


> 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 

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest