[WriteLog] Cabrillo confusion

[Darack, Zev]

This is from the rules.  Basicaly it says if you claim the QSO for credit
there is a penalty but since with cabrillo the log checking computer does
the scoring this is not an issue.

http://www.arrl.org/contests/rules/2002/rules-iaru.html

13. Disqualification: Any entry may be disqualified if the overall score is
reduced by more than 2%. Score reductions do not include correction of
arithmetic errors. Any entry may be disqualified if more than 2% of
duplicate QSOs are left in the log and claimed for credit. A three-QSO
reduction will be assessed for each duplicate QSO found during log checking
or for miscopied call signs in paper logs. For electronic logs, a one-QSO
penalty will be assessed for a miscopied call sign or a duplicate QSO
claimed for QSO credit. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Henderson [mailto:bob@cytanet.com.cy]
Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2002 2:46 AM
To: Writelog@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [WriteLog] Cabrillo confusion


Well no, the rules for the IARU contest say that there is a penalty for
unmarked dupes in a computer log.  That's what concerned me.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Darack, Zev" <Zev.Darack@banklink.com>
To: "'Bob Henderson'" <bob@cytanet.com.cy>
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 9:06 PM
Subject: RE: [WriteLog] Cabrillo confusion


> Yea, I had the same question the first couple times....some day they will
> update it.  I think the WRTC rules actually had something about the fact
> that only paperlogs recieved the penalty
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Henderson [mailto:bob@cytanet.com.cy]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 4:55 PM
> To: Writelog@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [WriteLog] Cabrillo confusion
>
>
> Thanks Zev, That's good to know.  It might be a good idea if contest
> organisers were to point out in their rules that dupe penalties etc don't
> apply to Cabrillo submissions.
>
> 73
>
> Bob 5B4AGN, P3F, ZC4ZM
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Darack, Zev" <Zev.Darack@banklink.com>
> To: "'Bob Henderson'" <bob@cytanet.com.cy>; <Writelog@contesting.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 6:20 PM
> Subject: RE: [WriteLog] Cabrillo confusion
>
>
> > No, log checking software looks at the dupes and removes them.  All
dupes
> > should be listed in the log and there should be no mark in the cabrillo
> file
> > indicating dupes.
> >
> > 73,
> > Zev N2WKS
> > http://www.qsl.net/n2wks
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Bob Henderson [mailto:bob@cytanet.com.cy]
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 7:23 AM
> > To: Writelog@contesting.com
> > Subject: [WriteLog] Cabrillo confusion
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  I too am concerned about my Cabrillo file for the IARU test.  Can
anyone
> > shed some definitive light on this subject?
> >
> > So far as I can determine the layout of the Cabrillo file produced by WL
> > matches the layout specified at www.kkn.net/~trey/cabrillo/  for the
IARU
> > contest.
> >
> > The specified layout is bereft of scoring and multiplier detail but Dave
> > K4JRB has confirmed that the Cabrillo log checking engine used by the
> judges
> > will correctly score logs based on the prescribed format.  So I guess
that
> > is ok.
> >
> > The one thing still causing me concern is that the Cabrillo output file
> does
> > not mark duplicates.  Now, given that a duplicate contact occurs because
> the
> > station worked believes I am not in his log whereas I believe we have
> > already worked, these QSO's need to remain in the log .  If I delete
> > duplicates then I maybe deleting the only valid contact I had with a
> > station.  BUT the IARU rules are very specific in that rule 13
stipulates
> > that for electronic logs a one-QSO penalty will be assessed for a
> miscopied
> > call sign or a duplicate QSO claimed for QSO credit.
> >
> > This looks like a Catch 22 to me.  Leave the QSOs in and get a Rule 13
> > penalty assessed.  Take 'em out and risk removing valid QSOs!!!!!
> >
> > It seems the course of least risk is for me to manually remove the
> > first QSO of any duplicate pair on the basis the station called me a
> second
> > time because he was convinced we didn't work first time around.  Problem
> > here is that if the station finds our first QSO when he unravels his log
> at
> > the end of the contest then there is no certainty he would delete our
> first
> > QSO from his log.  He might easily delete the second QSO.
> >
> > The BIG question is: Should Writelog have marked duplicates as such
> > in the Cabrillo output file?
> >
> > 73
> >
> > Bob 5B4AGN, P3F, ZC4ZM
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > WriteLog mailing list
> > WriteLog@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/writelog
> >
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WriteLog mailing list
> WriteLog@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/writelog
>


_______________________________________________
WriteLog mailing list
WriteLog@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/writelog