[CQ-Contest] Summary of Software and Transceivers used by WRTC teams

Jim Brown k9yc at audiosystemsgroup.com
Tue Aug 7 11:57:19 EDT 2018

Looking only at top ten finishers fails to appreciate the importance of 
operator experience with propagation from the operating region. THAT'S a 
large part of why EU ops are so strongly represented at the top.

There are other factors. A competitor friend (who placed in the top 
third of the pack) told me yesterday that the top scoring team, from 
Lithuania, had something like 250 unique LY QSOs in their log that were 
not penalized, and that removing those Qs would have greatly reduced 
their lead over second and third place. He said they also had QSOs 
removed for exchange errors that were clearly copied and logged 
correctly based on their recording.

73, Jim K9YC

On 8/6/2018 4:43 AM, Bob Burns W9BU wrote:
> Bob, I put together my own list, but only looked at the top 10 finishers.
> Among the top 10 finishers, there were 7 Yaesus, 6 Icoms, 4 Elecrafts, 
> and 3 Kenwoods.
> Also, among the top 10 finishers, 6 of them used Wintest and 4 used N1MM 
> Logger+.
> One of my elmers points out that doing well in this event has a lot more 
> to do with the skill of the operators than the tools they are using. He 
> also points out that slight differences in propagation and the noise 
> level at each site are also a factor.

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list