[CQ-Contest] RDXC Log Checking

Robert L. Shohet kq2m at earthlink.net
Tue Mar 10 11:52:04 PDT 2009

WM5R said:

On aggregate, you are no more likely to lose points because of other ops' 
errors than your competition is likely to lose point because of those same 
copying errors.  Unless you are somehow more likely to attract the flakes on 
the air
than the stations you are competing against, it doesn't put you at a 

Kenneth E. Harker WM5R

Negative!  K7GK makes an excellent point.  In addition, these rules and 
penalties also mean
that those who would otherwise dig deep into the crud and qrn to work the 
weak low power
stations now have a true disincentive for doing so.

If I can work S5 and up stations with 99.9% accuracy, but only maybe 88% 
with S4 and lower stations, I have no reason to even consider working weaker 
since the error rate will almost cancel out most of the ones I get right - 
this is especially
true since I am **also** penalized by stations that miscopy my call and 

It is much easier to save the "wear and tear" and to just call cq again and 
hope for
someone louder to call me.  Some Multis already use this "strategy" when 
they are
running EU and an SA station calls them off of the side/back of the antenna. 
I have read
several past posts from PY's and LU's on this reflector and 3830 in the past 
about this.

So you ARE at a disadvantage if you try to work everyone compared to a lazy 
who doesn't care.  I don't see how this helps anyone.  It means those that 
work harder
at making q's can potentially wind up with a lower score than those who just 
weak guys and push "F1".  The weaker stations are the biggest loser of all 
since even
less people will make the effort to work them.  In addition, I also lose if 
I am weak and
try to call a station in RDXC who is more interesting in avoiding penalties 
than gaining
qso points!

Bob KQ2M

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list