[CQ-Contest] CQ WW Rules and SCP

Tim Shoppa tshoppa at gmail.com
Tue Jun 18 06:49:27 EDT 2013

N2IC writes:
> 19. Correction of logged call signs by using any database ...  is not
> When you use SCP, you are using a database. This would make using SCP a
> rules violation.

I disagree. The rule-writers used the phrase "logged call signs", not "call
signs". Using SCP before logging the contact - as indeed most hams would be
using it - remains fine. We are also of course using the "Database of calls
in our heads" which for a good contester is many tens of thousands of calls
too. The "post contest analysis tools" would not be OK, even those that
might be built into a contest logger.

A more general thought: as contest organizers move towards "near complete
log checking", getting rid of the "penalty for busted calls and exchanges"
seems like a good idea, as the fear of the penalty probably was driving
some to do post-contest corrections and tweaks. Several contests have
already done that.

Outside of CQWW, some rule technicalities that seem rarely invoked, e.g.
ARRL General Rule "7.1. If the claimed score of a participant is reduced by
2% or more, the entry may be disqualified." also might be removed because
again fear of the disqualification may have been forcing people towards
post-contest corrections and tweaks. Indeed, combine the 2% score DQ
threshold with the x3 bust penalty, and just 0.66% invalid QSO's could've
led to disqualification, and that seems horribly onerous. Indeed the
concept of "claimed score" seems outdated, with all the special calls that
pop up in many big DX contests such that a DXCC mult count cannot be
realistically done by computer.

Tim N3QE

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list