[CQ-Contest] CQ WW Rule Changes

Ivo Pezer E73A/9A3A ivo.pezer at alice.it
Tue Oct 30 14:01:54 EDT 2012

Hi Jukka

I think Mario was referring to something else: most contest QSOs actually do 
not include full exchange (STN 1 de STN 2, RST....). In case when STN 2 is 
responding to STN 1 who is running pile up, you usually only get STN 2 
callsingn. If he/she for whatever reason did not get STN 1 call correct, 
this is in most cases unknown to STN 2, who rarely sends you your own 
callsign, yet you get penalized for his error.

Being one of those who increases the speed as the pile up grows, I share 
Mario's concerns. If I ID every time, whoever is not sure of my call can 
either ask me to repeat it or listen to the next QSO(s) and validate if he 
copied it correctly.

73 Ivo I7/9A3A, 4U1GSC

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jukka Klemola" <jpklemola at gmail.com>
To: "cq-contest" <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 2:33 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Rule Changes

> ..
>> CW sending errors are rare with the majority of PC TX.  Russians are 
>> wrong
>> penalizing me for all the variations of S56A immaginable!
> I had a chat about this with Harry or Vlad.
> The reason is you hear what the other station sends.
> If he sends a strange variation of S56A it is _your_ responsibility to
> get it right.
> That is, you are responsible of delivering your call to the other log.
> Yes .. he has a responsibility to copy it correct.
> But that does not fully void your responsibility.
>> LP MMM S56A
> 73,
> Jukka OH6LI
> _______________________________________________
> 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