[CQ-Contest] Russian DX Contest Log Checking

[Igor Sokolov]

Yes Bob, there can be such an approach. But based on the fact that it is a 
contest in accuracy of delivering information from A to B would it not be 
more logical to blame both? Thre are two parties in the QSO. It is somthing 
like a small temporary team. If the team fails to exchange information the 
entire team should be penalised. Isn't it fare?
On the other hand if you allow SN +/- 1 then why not go a step further and 
allow call sign +/- one letter?

73, Igor UA9CDC

> That's precisely why most judges in serial number contests allow S/N +/- 
> 1. You cannot tell who is wrong, so blame neither.
>
> This is a much cleaner and more satisfactory solution to this common 
> problem.
>
> 73 de Bob, K6XX
>
> ---------- Original Message ----------
> From: "Igor Sokolov" <ua9cdc at gmail.com>
> To: <sawyered at earthlink.net>, <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Russian DX Contest Log Checking
> Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 20:42:05 +0500
> This topic had been beaten to death in Russian contest reflector some time
> ago. Here is counter argument from that discussion:
> N1UR calls CQ
> UA9CDC calls N1UR and gives him 599 244
> UA9CDC logs QSO but the sent number in his log is 245. The reason for that
> can be anything. The op is operating with this software for the first time
> and takes serial number from the wrong place on the screen. Or UA9CDC was
> multy op station and  the software used changed the number after 244 was
> sent. So it ended up as 245 in UA9CDC log.
> Now how adjudicators have to decide who has to be penalized?
>
> 73, Igor UA9CDC
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> Criminal Lawyers - Click here.
> http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2131/fc/BLSrjnsMx6wGsuJA2JGO4DMFWykKJI3tEySJ7Tp3ODV0qGzkSuTBz8vASMg/
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest