[CQ-Contest] CQWW CW check logs

[David Siddall]

Yuri & all,

Item X.2. of the CQWW contest rules require contestants to leave *ALL* QSOs
in their log and explains how they will be handled.  This is not
"optional".  Don't know what else can be done on this issue, other than
more education.  I don't know about your particular case, but most that we
work in contests are part-time casual contesters whose participation we
want to encourage.  They don't spend a lot of time studying the rules, and
indeed, I think that most have never read the complete rules.  How many of
us each year have read the complete rules for every contest for which we
submitted a log? That's just life.   If  this occurred with a serious
contester, maybe that contester is not as expert as they could be.

Direct from the CQWW rules:

   *X. LOG INSTRUCTIONS: *


   *****


   *2. **Single band entrants are required to include all contacts* made
   during the contest period, even if on other bands. Only contacts made on
   the band specified in the Cabrillo header or summary sheet will be
   considered for scoring purposes. Logs with contacts only on one band will
   be classified as single band entries.

73,  Dave K3ZJ



On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 5:53 PM, Yuri <ve3dz at rigexpert.net> wrote:

> In the 2014 SSB Contest, I moved one DX station from 10 to 15 and then to
> 20 m for a new multiplier (The DX station graciously agreed to move).
> After receiving my UBN file I found that both 15 and 20 m QSO's with this
> DX station were marked as Not-In-Log and I lost 2 multipliers + I was
> penalized.
> However, all 3 QSOs are confirmed on the LoTW...
> I discovered that the above mentioned DX submitted Single Band (10 m) LOG
> and removed all other QSO's from his LOG thus penalizing everybody he
> worked outside 10 m band...
> I don't know, maybe CQ WW Committee should explain the policy of a "single
> band" category more clearly... Or, what else can be done to avoid
> situations like that?
> And what if it's done on purpose, like in the example with that SM
> operator?
> Makes you a bit mad if you can't control things like that.
>
> Yuri  VE3DZ  (VE2IM in both WW's last year)
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve London" <n2icarrl at gmail.com>
> To: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Sent: 03 May, 2015 17:44
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW CW check logs
>
>
>
>>
>> On 05/03/2015 08:01 AM, Randy Thompson K5ZD wrote:
>>
>>> The concept of CHECKLOG has existed for many years.  It is a log that is
>>> submitted to help the log checking process, but the entrant does not want
>>> their score to be included in the results.
>>>
>>
>> As I have learned, Checklogs can be used for nefarious purposes. In
>> particular, there is a Swedish operator who works many people in the
>> contest, but then deletes calls from his log if he does not think you are a
>> good QSLer. This results in the deleted stations getting NIL's in their
>> logs (and the associated penalties), while the Swedish stations' log
>> remains completely hidden. Checklogs have not been included in the database
>> of open logs.
>>
>> Frankly, I think Checklogs should be eliminated. Either send in your log
>> for scoring, or don't send in a log at all.
>>
>> 73,
>> Steve, N2IC
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>