[TOEC] [CCF] Q on SAC rules "ENN ###"

[Mats Strandberg]

Well, as we said before... no full truths are found in either of the schools
:)

Believe me, when we worked RDXC as R3/DL5EBE, the UBN reading required a
valium or two...

On the other hand, both me and the owner of the call, should perhaps have
reduced speed at time, to make sure that the long and complicated call with
basically only dits (no offence Ingemar...), was copied better.

Secondly, make sure to work a lot of contests and get known in the
databases...

Ok, we have different opinions on this one Mike - but agree about the sizzy
ENN's, so cheers anyway and make sure our brothers in the east will sweat
severly in a few days :)

73 and GL in SAC all!

RA/SM6LRR, Mats

2011/9/13 Mikael Larsmark <mike at sm3wmv.com>

> Yes, but that still does not remove errors which you impossibly can not
> help. If the other guy is bad at typing and enters 0 insted of O etc,
> which happens, I don't see how you could manage to find that out as the
> TX part. Or if he messes up entering SM6LRL instead of SM6LRR because he
> typed wrong, how can you as a TX part make him notice his typing error?
>
> Also, lets say there is a lot of QRM on the band, the guy logs your
> serial number incorrectly, how can you find out that he did that? Should
> everybody repeat what serial number they think they heard?
>
> People who can't handle QRQ maybe shouldn't call those stations. That
> will also solve the problem, since you will lose by going too fast. JAs
> are good at this, in JA contests you usually need to go down to 24 wpm
> or so to get answers.
>
> Lots of errors are not caused by QRQ but because of QRM, people calling
> before the TX PTT has dropped etc. Would be fun to see how many S5
> stations has become I5 because of just that.
>
> Mike, SM2WMV (SJ2W)
> http://www.sj2w.se/contest/
>
> On 09/13/2011 08:43 PM, Mats Strandberg wrote:
> > I don't agree on that one Mike...
> >
> > The rules will affect all the good ops in the same way - because the less
> > experienced guy typing wrong or getting the message wrong, is likely to
> > repeat his mistake many times with many operators... But if you as an
> > excellent operator, manage to reduce the mistakes of the lids by
> adjusting
> > your speed to his ability, then it proves that you are a better operator
> > than someone who fails to do so...
> >
> > In CQWW (and SAC) the only ones who are favoured are the QRQ-machines....
> I
> > have no problems to compete in that category either... but it does not
> > stimulate the skills of the operator to BOTH receive correctly, and make
> > sure that the opponent does the same...
> >
> >
> >
> > 2011/9/13 Mikael Larsmark<mike at sm3wmv.com>
> >
> >> Hello
> >>
> >> Because it is very irritating when losing points because of the other
> >> station being a lid or just just making an typing error. That is not
> >> your fault, you could not have done anything about it and still you get
> >> a penalty, I find that wrong.
> >>
> >> So I much rather see the methods used for in example CQWW where the guy
> >> making the mistake gets the penalty. Because lets face it, there are
> >> very few qsos that are crossed off because of the TX station making an
> >> error compared to the RX station.
> >>
> >> And about abbreviations I really hate those too. I believe it causes
> >> more confusion and repeats than it actually gives you a faster rate. I
> >> can get using T and N to some extent, but not like A5NT for 1590.
> >>
> >> Mike, SM2WMV (SJ2W)
> >> M/S in SAC CW from SJ2W; http://www.sj2w.se/contest/
> >>
> >> On 09/13/2011 08:28 PM, Mats Strandberg wrote:
> >>> The adjustment of the speed to that both QRQ BIG GUNS and the QRS small
> >>> pistols can copy both the call and the exchange is a thrilling
> challenge
> >>> that requires quite awake operators... so I am not so sure if it so
> easy
> >> to
> >>> say that "I am not responsible for the other stations miscopying"....
> >>>
> >>> I personally do not see the "CONS" in the Russian school of log
> >> checking....
> >>> and also not the advantages in the US approach.  Can someone enlight me
> a
> >>> bit?
> >>>
> >>> 73 de Mats
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> TOEC mailing list
> >> TOEC at contesting.com
> >> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/toec
> >>
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> TOEC mailing list
> TOEC at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/toec
>