[ct-user] Re: [CQ-Contest] Log checking Revisited

[David A. Pruett]

At 10:19 PM 7/13/03 +0000, N7MAL wrote:
>Regarding the recent thread where it appears log checkers have some 
>latitude in determining whether we copy an exchange correctly or 
>incorrectly.  Here is an excerpt from this weekend with PJ2HQ. CT did not 
>allow enough room to type the exchange and as a result I result I could be 
>penalized even though I copied the exchange correctly(VERONA).
>PJ2HQ         599 VERON (This from the Cabrillo file)
>
>I participate for fun but for some of the 'big-guns' one or more points
>reduced because the logging software didn't leave room could spell doom.

Mal,

I've done the IARU contest using computer logging for 15 years.  For most 
of that time, my logging software (NA, which I author) would only allow for 
four digits in the received zone/HQ field.  (I recently changed it to allow 
for six.)  Many times, I've had to cut off the abbreviation to fit the four 
character field.  In all the IARU contests I have done, I have never once 
lost a HQ multiplier because of this.

I think many critics of computer logging think the logcheckers are out to 
"get" the entrants in any way possible.  While I can only speak for the 
ARRL 160/10 contests which I do, I don't think this is the case.  We go to 
great lengths to accommodate legitimate variations in logging, and I 
suspect the other teams do likewise.

Dave/K8CC