[CQ-Contest] TO7A: audience comments so far

[john at kk9a.com]

I think many are commenting on N2IC's post which asked "Are his rates
believable ?"  If you watch the youtube videos it is obvious that UT5UGR
is a very skilled CW operator. There are other ops that have made very
amazing CQWW QSO rates and totals and we do not question if they are
legitimate. The disqualification was for running assisted and not claiming
it. Without knowing all of the facts I cannot comment on the committee's
decision. If Dimitry did operate assisted and entered that category he
would have had the world high score which is not easy from North America.

John KK9A


To:	cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject:	[CQ-Contest] TO7A: audience comments so far
From:	kr2q at optimum.net
Date:	Fri, 08 May 2015 10:18:50 +0000 (GMT)


First, I was not involved, in any way at all, in the log review of this log,
nor the DQ decision.

Please look at the current (May 4) CQWW blog from Randy, find TO7A, and
look at
the reason
for the DQ.

Specifically: TO7A (UT5UGR)     Unclaimed assistance

So those of you who are gawking at the "dueling CQs" (BTW, not dual CQs, but
dueling CQ),
that was clearly not an issue - and never is as long they are not on the same
band.
How would someone get DQed for "unclaimed assistance" by using dueling CQs?

So far, IMHO, the award for "how to look at a log that was DQed for unclaimed
assistance"
goes to K6LA.

Read his post.
http://lists.contesting.com/pipermail/cq-contest/2015-May/109403.html

N2IC, again IMHO, nails it too, but without any details:
"When he works multipliers not on his run frequency, is it believable without
assistance ?"

We all can learn a lot by reviewing many public logs.  It's a useful
exercise.

de Doug KR2Q