Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Incorrect\s+conclusions\s+about\s+un\-assisted\s+versus\s+assisted\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Incorrect\s+conclusions\s+about\s+un\-assisted\s+versus\s+assisted\s*$/: 2 ]

Total 2 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Incorrect conclusions about un-assisted versus assisted (score: 1): Author: Tree <tree@kkn.net>; Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 14:45:25 -0800; When I see this comment - I just have to jump up and down and make as much noise as I can - as it is the totally wrong conclusion to jump to. The reason that you see typically lower un-assisted score; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-12/msg00467.html (8,132 bytes)
2. [CQ-Contest] Incorrect conclusions about un-assisted versus assisted (score: 1): Author: "Jamie Dupree NS3T" <ns3t@arrl.net>; Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 20:32:04 -0500; Tree, I must disagree. The facts and figures from contests don't support your claim that assisted ops routinely have higher scores. UN-assisted operators typically score BETTER - not worse than assis; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-12/msg00476.html (10,482 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 2
Page: [1]