[CQ-Contest] WPX CW

Thu May 30 09:49:21 EDT 2013

It seems to me that the "don't name names" syndrome is fairly widespread 
in ham radio, though perhaps a little less so than in prior years.  I've 
always been inclined to identify this as "Don Miller syndrome," dating 
to the time when ARRL was sued for disallowing some of his phonier 
DXpeditions.  It's time to stop being gun-shy, folks - we now have at 
least some of the evidence, in the form of I/Q recordings of entire 
contests, so there's no reason not to bring public opinion to bear.  I'm 
not specifically talking about operating practices here, but about at 
least the more egregious of rule violations.  If you know about it, call 
'em on it, publicly!

73, Pete N4ZR
Check out the Reverse Beacon Network at
http://reversebeacon.net,
blog at reversebeacon.blogspot.com.
For spots, please go to your favorite
ARC V6 or VE7CC DX cluster node.

On 5/30/2013 12:07 AM, Mats Strandberg wrote:
> This is a very important point.
>
> I am myself not better than others. I was "jumped on" by a few Aligator big
> guns, with signal strenghts of around 559-579 on 20 meters. I do not think
> they intentionally wanted to steaa my frequency (20 meter CW, me using 800
> W), but more a simple issue that the difference in power  between us made
> them not hear my 800 W "QRP" signals...
>
> I feel tempted to address this openly on the forum with call signs, because
> this is a SYSTEM more than an unlucky coincidence.I now begin to understand
> which stations run more and which run less than Full Legal Limit. Anyone
> else noticed ths same phenomena?
>
> But still I am gathering "courage" and as close to 100% statistical
> evidence that my assumptions are correct.
>
> The same intereting issue is that some stations seem to have extremely
> "noicy" RX conditions - always. With such signal strenghts as described
> above, I still always (no exceptions) need to repeat my call and serial
> numbers many times, while this is not the case when calling weak US big
> guns during poor conditions when signal strengths are 519-539.
>
> In 95% of the cases, US and Canadian stations are still able to get both my
> call and serial numbers just sent one.
>
> Interesting difference between US and European (and other) big guns...
>
>
> 73 de RM2D (Mats)
>
>
> 2013/5/30 Randy Thompson K5ZD <k5zd at charter.net>
>
>> They will be "held accountable" when people are willing to name calls in
>> these public complaints...
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
>>> Steve Bookout
>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 2:29 PM
>>> To: Cqtestk4xs at aol.com
>>> Cc: cq-contest at contesting.com
>>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WPX CW
>>>
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> As we know, sometimes 'stuff' happens when changing rcvr filters, RIT or
>>> changing antennas.  These bad situations shouldn't really last longer
>>> than it takes to flip a switch or spin the dial.  Sometimes neither
>>> station feels THEY should be the one to move.  Like I said 'stuff'
>>> happens and this is contesting.
>>>
>>> This becomes a problem, WHEN THE SAME STATION, time after time, contest
>>> after contest, drops on top of you and starts CQ'ing.
>>>
>>> People, +\- 100 Hz is not a clear frequency!
>>>
>>> There are a couple of stations that are infamous for this. When will they
>>> be held accountable for their arrogance and poor operating ethics?
>>>
>>> 73 de Steve, NR4M
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On May 29, 2013, at 7:28, Cqtestk4xs at aol.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> My favorite is a certain zone 8 station that called me on my frequency
>>>> and then after he worked me, began to call CQ 100Hz away from my run
>>>> freq. It took a  couple of minutes to pry him off me.
>>>>
>>>> Bill K4XS/KH7XS
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In a message dated 5/29/2013 10:48:23 A.M. Coordinated Universal Tim,
>>>> g4odv at yahoo.co.uk writes:
>>>>
>>>> Hello  Jesus,
>>>>
>>>> I am truly sorry to have caused you this concern, I should have  said
>>>> that it was a remarkable  coincidence that you landed on my qrg,
>>>> which did happen 3 or 4 times . I really should have put that in a
>>>> better way  or preferably not mentioned it at all. Please accept my
>>> public  apologies..
>>>> 73  Bria
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ________________________________
>>>> From: EC1KR Jesus  <ec1kr at ec1kr.com>
>>>> To: g4odv at yahoo.co.uk
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, 28 May  2013, 17:24
>>>> Subject: WPX CW
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Brian.
>>>>
>>>> Just  read your comments at 3830scores  about
>>>> us:
>>>>
>>>> -------------------------
>>>> On the other hand it  was remarkable the number of times ED1R chose to
>>>> land on my qrg. He was  weak and I am not saying he was hearing me but
>>>> I was hearing his callers  who were busting up the esp numbers I was
>>>> trying to  get..
>>>> --------------------------
>>>>
>>>> If we were weak there perhaps  we did not hear you at all as you are
>>>> off the back or off the side of our  beams. Also we set very narrow
>>>> filtering. Elementary it is not our  intention to make delibetate QRM
>>>> and we always play within the contest  rules. Nevertheless we
>>>> apologize for the trouble. Next time please do not  hesitate to turn
>>>> your antenna and ask for QSY.
>>>>
>>>> We do not seek  controversy, but understands that is a Contest with a
>>>> very bad propagation  conditions where punishment not we heard each
>>>> other.
>>>>
>>>> A  greeting.
>>>>
>>>> 73 de Jesus EC1KR / ED1R
>>>> Blog.    www.ec1kr.com
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>