Topband: Re : CQWW160

[Bill Tippett]

Vlad UA6LV (et al) wrote:

 >In 2005 we decided to conduct some kind of experiment and sent
COMPLETELY FAKE contest LOG of  RA6YP. This station has never been
active on Topband. The LOG contained some 1000 QSOs.
And  what do you think ? His call appeared in the Final results with
almost 500 confirmed  QSO! All the U.S. multipliers were confirmed.
RA6YP had a pretty decent result in a M/S category.

         This is very disappointing news!  The CQ 160 under
N4IN's administration was one of the very first contests
to use computerized log-checking (long before the CQ WW's
UBN process) and was a major reason it became one of my
favorite contests.

"Don N4IN at his shack in Melbourne, FL in the late 1980's.  Don was 
years ahead of his time in the thoroughness he applied to checking 
logs for the CQ 160 Contest.  Today's UBN analysis is very similar to 
what Don did single-handedly >15 years ago with a Radio Shack 
TRS-80!  Thank you Don for the integrity you brought to the CQ 
160...it remains my favorite contest today because of the traditions 
you started!"

http://users.vnet.net/btippett/new_page_2.htm

         Even if this were a legitimate entry, how
could it possibly meet the following published
rules with  QSO's reduced from 1000 to 500?

Final Score: Total QSO points times the
sum of all multipliers (states, VE, DX countries).
Penalties: Three additional contacts may be
deleted for each unverified contact removed
from the log.
Disqualification: A log may be disqualified
for violation of amateur radio regulations, unsportsmanlike
conduct, or claiming excessive
unverified contacts.

http://www.cq-amateur-radio.com/160ContestRules122705NEW.pdf

         Hopefully something can be done about
this for the 2006 running of the CQ 160 and
thank you for bringing the problem to light Vlad!

                                 73,  Bill  W4ZV