[UK-CONTEST] Penalties

[Roger Western]

Dave - surely that's statistically incorrect. With a three-times penalty for 
Busted QSOs there will be three times the likelihood of losing a table rank 
order than if QSOs are simply removed. Not everyone has the same number of 
Busted QSOs.

The concept of penalising, not just removing, is widely accepted in contests 
around the world. Without it you simply encourage log-padding: "Well, I 
think he came back to me so I will log it just in case". As others have said 
surely we should encourage self-improvement (accurate operating), not 
encourage semi-cheating.
73 de Roger/g3SXW.


-----Original Message----- 
From: Dave Sergeant
Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2012 6:07 PM
To: uk-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] Penalties

Well this was driven through when I received my UBN for the recent Low
Power contest. I used a paper log on site out of necessity, but was
obviously a bit too hasty typing it into SD afterwards. Two of my three
errors were purely my fault - a 599 incorrectly typed as 559 from the
line above, and a 599 typed as a 598! At least I still had my paper log
to show I should have double checked. In that contest the first two
places in the 3W /P section were pretty close, without those two
booboos I could quite well have come first.

Penalising harshly for errors has swings and roundabout, but you also
have to bear in mind that everybody would have their scores similarly
reduced so the final table position might not be affected that much.

73 Dave G3YMC

On 30 Aug 2012 at 17:55, G4FNL wrote:

> I think that the idea that new (or casual) competitors being put off
> entering a contest because of a penalty is a bit patronising. If a
> penalty system for wrongly logged exchange info was introduced (for RSGB
> contests) then it would surely make people more careful.


http://www.davesergeant.com

_______________________________________________
UK-Contest mailing list
UK-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest