[CQ-Contest] KR2Q - RX1CQ

[Tom W8JI]

I think we should mandate log errors for people who have abnormally accurate 
logs. Let's call it dyslexic based scoring.

After all, we all know the reason for not succeeding always is with the 
person who does better.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bob Naumann" <W5OV at W5OV.COM>
To: "'Mats Strandberg'" <sm6lrr at gmail.com>; <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2011 6:54 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] KR2Q - RX1CQ


> Just to clear the "air" a bit on this, there are many logs that have no 
> qsos
> removed and the claimed scores remain unchanged.
>
> A quick look shows:
> Claimed and
> Call Final Q
> N6ML 518
> DP4M 505
> LY3CY 495
> GW4BLE 474
> K1TR 423
> F6EWX 397
> OK2ILD 394
> G4WGE 385
> VE2AWR 371
> VA3DX 356
> K9MMS 350
>
> It seems that this is not so rare at all.
>
> 73,
>
> Bob W5OV
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Mats Strandberg
> Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 6:59 AM
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] KR2Q - RX1CQ
>
> Amazing "performance" by the guys checking the logs of the QRP-section of
> the contest I would say.
>
> I have seen many dubious results in QRP during the years, but the CQWW 
> 2010
> results must compete in a very unique category.
>
> Anything else than publishing of the two UBN-logs would be a big
> dissapointment.
>
> Please observe that I do not take any side in this debate. The winner 
> could
> definitely be the legitimate winner, BUT noone, and I mean noone, can 
> manage
> to keep the claimed scores unchanged...
>
> If the CQWW CC lacks interest, skills or guts to fairly judge the
> QRP-section, then better remove this category at all!
>
> The efforts made by QRP-contesters are by no means less impressive than 
> HP-
> and LP-entries. These guys need the same kind of attention and detailed
> checking as anyone else. A lot of things is going in behind the curtains 
> in
> QRP-contesting - therefore careful and EQUAL treatment of all top-scoring
> stations should be compulsory.
>
> 73 and 72 / RA/SM6LRR, Mats
> _______________________________________________
> 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