[UK-CONTEST] SSB CC

Peter Hobbs peter at tilgate.co.uk
Wed Feb 4 06:11:03 EST 2009


Bear in mind this is a team (club) event - there are no prizes for 
individual session winners!  Every entrant, however small, makes a real 
contribution.  Barriers (or complications) to entry should be kept minimal.

People have always been able to give what reports they like and there's no 
harm in encouraging that.  The 599 syndrome has only been with us since the 
advent of the computer loggers, which encouraged people to be lazy.  I don't 
know whether report errors lead to a busted QSO - I guess this is up to 
individual evaluators - but if that spectre were to be removed it might help 
to encourage real reports (on Monday, how many QSOs were really Q5?).

73, Peter G3LET

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Ferrington, M0XDF" <M0XDF at Alphadene.co.uk>
To: <uk-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 10:42 AM
Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] SSB CC


> Now I'm going to be controversial...
>
> No multipliers please.
>
> For those of us just getting started or in locations where full size,
> resonant antennas are not possible, getting to some 'squares' on SSB
> could be hard.
> For those with lots of space, perhaps no near neighbours, unlimited
> antenna farms with full size dipoles etc, a vertical here and there,
> beverages and maybe even a beam on 80m, hitting the top spot would be
> relatively easy.
> This would mean those of us limited by location wouldn't stand a
> chance of getting close to the top (and I find it hard enough as it is).
> Unless of course you want to introduce many handicap criteria, like
> the antenna used, more on power, perhaps level of license (maybe 3
> power sections; 10, 50, 400W).
>
> Personally, I view these as friendly contests, great for getting new
> licensees started and having a dabble, you can strive to beat
> yourself, but chances of winning personally are small. Can we keep it
> the way it is in terms of scoring please.
> It it ain't broke, don't fix it.
>
> Fine if we introduce locators too and maybe (gasp) give 'real'
> reports, so new licensees get a better understanding.
> 73 de M0XDF
> -- 
> Not all those that wander are lost. -J.R.R. Tolkien, novelist and
> philologist (1892-1973)
>
> On 4 Feb 2009, at 09:12, Andy Swiffin wrote:
>
>>>>> On 03/02/2009 at 20:50, in message
>>>>> <004801c98640$ff3ebb60$0e64a2d5 at ke>, " Ken
>> Eastty" <ken.g3lvp at btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> It would be interesting to plot where the activity is, perhaps we
>>> should
>>> stop sending meaningless 5&9(9) reports for every QSO in contests
>>> and send
>>> instead the locator square, I know that it would slow things up a
>>> bit but at
>>> least the exchange would have more value than the present exchange of
>>> 'reports'. (Yes I know it's all in QRZ.com if I could be bothered)
>>>
>>
>> Yes please!!   I've raised this a few times here to a complete lack
>> of enthusiasm, it would make the contests a load more interesting,
>> how about with a squares multiplier?
>
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.233 / Virus Database: 270.10.17/1933 - Release Date: 02/03/09 
07:57:00



More information about the UK-Contest mailing list