[UK-CONTEST] BERU UBN?

[Clive GM3POI]

I would like to know why the CC don't use a proper penalty when a call 
is busted of an additional two Qs being removed. Otherwise there is no 
real penalty in guessing using SCP etc.
     With a loss of three Qs for a bust, entrants would be more careful. 
73 Clive GM3POI


On 18/07/2011 15:46, G4LMW wrote:
> Do they?
>
> I just checked with a couple of them and they say not.
>
> Unless we are talking at cross-purposes? Do you mean that a QSO might be
> worth (say) 4 points, but you only lose a portion of that score for an
> error?
>
> Otherwise, at VHF, "10" logged as "11" is a "fail".
>
> Rob, G4LMW
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rob Harrison"<robharrison at g8hgn.freeserve.co.uk>
> To: "G4LMW"<g4lmw at btconnect.com>; "UK Contesting"
> <uk-contest at contesting.com>
> Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 1:39 PM
> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] BERU UBN?
>
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> The VHF adjudicators seem to find the time to intervene with this sort of
>> error.
>>
>> Bob G8HGN
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "G4LMW"<g4lmw at btconnect.com>
>> To: "UK Contesting"<uk-contest at contesting.com>
>> Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 1:32 PM
>> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] BERU UBN?
>>
>>
>>> Andy
>>>
>>> All the adjudicators have to go by is what is in the other log. If 11 is
>>> ok
>>> if logged as 10, then 15 is OK if logged as 75, after all it is only 1
>>> digit
>>> out.
>>>
>>> Given that it is the same for everyone, I have no problem with the
>>> concept
>>> that any error causes the loss of the QSO. Any other method of scoring
>>> requires either far more complex programming or human intervention.
>>>
>>> 73
>>> Rob, G4LMW
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Andy Summers"<g4kno.mail at gmail.com>
>>> To: "UK Contesting"<uk-contest at contesting.com>
>>> Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 1:16 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] BERU UBN?
>>>
>>>
>>>> So, I now have my UBN report for BERU. Many thanks to all the hard work
>>>> from
>>>> the adjudicators and the software writers.
>>>>
>>>> I've never received a UBN report before, so it's been enlightening. I've
>>>> never previously been able to see where my lost points have gone, so, at
>>>> the
>>>> risk of looking like an idiot for the second time in as many weeks, I
>>>> now
>>>> have some general comments about scoring.
>>>>
>>>> The general HF rules state that any error at all results in the loss of
>>>> all
>>>> points. There's no ambiguity here, but I'm questioning whether that
>>>> should
>>>> continue to be the case now that software can do much of the donkey
>>>> work.
>>>>
>>>> Two of my Q's were broken by the SerRx being out by just 1. How can the
>>>> adjudicator be certain the sender wasn't looking at the wrong bit on his
>>>> logging screen? The difference between 10&  11 (one of the examples) is
>>>> also
>>>> quite distinct on CW. With my CW it probably was my fault, but it feels
>>>> a
>>>> tad harsh to lose all the points in these instances. But I can also
>>>> recall
>>>> plenty of instances in SSB Field Day where the sender omitted to append
>>>> /P
>>>> to their callsign. Again, it seems harsh to lose all credit for the Q.
>>>>
>>>> It also feels pointless having more than 1 point per Q if we continue
>>>> with
>>>> the status quo?
>>>>
>>>> Already looking forward to next year's BERU...
>>>>
>>>> 73 Andy, G4KNO.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Andy Summers<g4kno.mail at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Sorry, I meant for BERU. Maybe I'm being a bit previous.
>>>>> Andy.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 12:33 PM, Andy Summers
>>>>> <g4kno.mail at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Did anyone else not receive their UBN report? Maybe they're being sent
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> batches?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 73 Andy, G4KNO.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> UK-Contest mailing list
>>>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
>>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> UK-Contest mailing list
>>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>