[CQ-Contest] CR3L Category Switch and PJ2T

Wayne Kline w3ea at hotmail.com
Wed Dec 9 08:51:38 EST 2015

Well said Jeff
Wayne W3EA
Better luck Next Year ... 
> From: jmaass at k8nd.com
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 01:06:09 -0500
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] CR3L Category Switch and PJ2T
> CC: ghoward at kent.edu; jim at w8wts.com; geneshea at gmail.com
> I was one of the operators at PJ2T during the CQWW CW contest. This posting
> is my personal opinion, and doesn't speak for the PJ2T CQWW CW Team or the
> CCC club as a whole
> On the day before the submission deadline, I predicted to the
> prematurely-celebrating PJ2T team members that CR3L would change categories
> from Multi-2 to Multi-Multi, based on the scores posted to 3830. This has
> happened to us before, and had prompted us to withhold 3830 postings until
> after posting deadlines for several years. It will likely do so again.
> I collected screen captures from the 3830 and the CQ 'Logs Received' website
> showing the progression of the CR3L submissions, and have now gathered them
> on a web page at  <http://www.k8nd.com/Radio/temp/CR3L_Category.html>
> http://www.k8nd.com/Radio/temp/CR3L_Category.html.   
> First, it is fact that CR3L first submitted their log to CQ in the 'Multi-Op
> Two' (Multi-2) category. 
> Second, it is fact that CR3L later submitted their log to CQ in the
> 'Multi-Op Unlimited' (Multi-Multi).
> Third, it is fact that there was nothing contrary to the rules in doing so.
> I have seen an email from one of the principle operators at CR3L that the
> reason for the category switch was some question about their lock-out of a
> multiplier station in the first six hours of the contest. I have no reason
> to believe or disbelieve that claim, but 'It Just Doesn't Matter'. A Multi-2
> meets the requirements for Multi-Multi, and is free to submit in that
> category.  Is it "slimy" or "unsportsmanlike" to do so based on 3830 scores
> reported?  I'm too close to the issue to make judgement, and leave such
> attributions to the contesting community and the CQ Contest Committee. 
> Should a Multi-Multi PJ2T have beat the score of a Multi-2 CR3L: YES.  I
> attribute that we did not run up a larger score than CR3L on some events
> beyond our control:
> 1. PJ2T suffered a power failure, requiring us to run low power under
> generator power on 40, 20, 15 and 10 meters for 6+ hours on Saturday during
> daylight hours.
> 2. PJ2T suffered a 13+ hour Internet failure during the daylight hours on
> Sunday, requiring us to operate without PacketCluster and Skimmer Server
> spots.
> 3. One of our PJ2T ops fell ill in Miami Airport on his way to Curacao, and
> was in the hospital throughout the contest. In addition to losing his
> skilled operator services, in his luggage were necessary parts for our DX
> Engineering 4-square receiving system and a laptop that was key to our
> planned on-site CW Skimmer system for 160- and 80-meters.
> So, congratulations to CR3L, who will be first in Multi-Multi category
> unless log checking swaps our places, or they are disqualified or demoted to
> 'Check Log' for some unrelated rules violation. 
> 73,  Jeff  K8ND
> _______________________________________________
> 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