Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+technical\s+challenge\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+technical\s+challenge\s*$/: 14 ]

Total 14 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] technical challenge (score: 1): Author: "Rick Dougherty NQ4I" <nq4i@contesting.com>; Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 15:24:23 -0400; Hi all....it has come to my attention that in every sport except Boxing and Ham Radio Contesting.... the score is known and posted for all to see in real time...I challenge the other USA M-M's to pos; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-05/msg00246.html (6,685 bytes)
2. Re: [CQ-Contest] technical challenge (score: 1): Author: Zack Widup <w9sz@prairienet.org>; Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 19:05:40 -0500 (CDT); Hmm ... in boxing, figure skating and probably most Olympic competitions, no one knows your score until your performance is over. Contesting is different because at least one person or group knows th; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-05/msg00249.html (7,630 bytes)
3. Re: [CQ-Contest] technical challenge (score: 1): Author: "Paul J. Piercey" <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com>; Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 11:21:02 -0000; I think what he meant was that you don't have to wait for some extended period of time to see the score published. You know as soon as it is tabulated. 3830 gave you the results of a few when they go; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-05/msg00251.html (10,137 bytes)
4. Re: [CQ-Contest] technical challenge (score: 1): Author: "K5ZM" <k5zm@comcast.net>; Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 19:25:45 -0700; I think we all know EXACTLY why live reporting hasn't been as well received as it otherwise could've been. That horse is dead. Let's not beat the crap out of it again. 73, Ian, K5ZM www.k5zm.com ____; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-05/msg00252.html (9,165 bytes)
5. Re: [CQ-Contest] technical challenge (score: 1): Author: Steve Harrison <k0xp@dandy.net>; Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 16:10:13 +0000; K1TTT mentioned Friday night that that was happening, and theorized that one of the types of loggers we're all using wasn't reporting mults correctly. At least one of the first cupla dozen 3830 refle; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-05/msg00259.html (7,929 bytes)
6. Re: [CQ-Contest] technical challenge (score: 1): Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@copper.net>; Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 10:21:05 -0700; ORIGINAL MESSAGE: -- REPLY FOLLOWS -- Perhaps I'm missing something. My question is, why use it? Why would you want to know other scores while the contest is still on? The only score that's important; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-05/msg00265.html (8,284 bytes)
7. Re: [CQ-Contest] technical challenge (score: 1): Author: Ev Tupis <w2ev@yahoo.com>; Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 13:38:40 -0700 (PDT); Perhaps I'm missing something. My question is, why use it? Why would you want to know other scores while the contest is still on? The only score that's important is the one at the end, and then only; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-05/msg00269.html (8,185 bytes)
8. Re: [CQ-Contest] technical challenge (score: 1): Author: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@mts.net>; Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 16:57:33 -0500; I guess that's the wonderful thing about ham radio: if you don't like contesting, go play satellites. If you don't like satellites, go play ATV (or SSTV). If you don't like HF, work on VHF DXing. Si; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-05/msg00272.html (9,598 bytes)
9. Re: [CQ-Contest] technical challenge (score: 1): Author: "Mark Beckwith" <n5ot@n5ot.com>; Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 17:16:27 -0500; I'm not sure this statement represents everyone, Ev. There are plenty of times where someone has pitched it in after learning that the op they were chasing was so far ahead of them, they threw in th; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-05/msg00274.html (8,415 bytes)
10. Re: [CQ-Contest] technical challenge (score: 1): Author: "Richard DiDonna NN3W" <nn3w@cox.net>; Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 20:12:05 -0400; I think it can cut both ways. If things are close, there is absolutely an incentive to flooring it for whatever time remains in the contest to "win". Indeed, in many contests we already have "semi" r; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-05/msg00282.html (10,879 bytes)
11. Re: [CQ-Contest] technical challenge (score: 1): Author: "K5ZM" <k5zm@comcast.net>; Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 17:39:59 -0700; B'zactly. And from what I recall from the last time this came up on the reflector, this was the mindset of more than just a few ops here and there. That's the totality of what I was referring to. No; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-05/msg00284.html (12,036 bytes)
12. Re: [CQ-Contest] technical challenge (score: 1): Author: "Paul J. Piercey" <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com>; Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 12:07:18 -0000; This might be true if the sole purpose of their contesting was to win. Seems to me that these guys might not have been "into it" to begin with. I know that the two times I've logged onto the site, i; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-05/msg00312.html (11,218 bytes)
13. Re: [CQ-Contest] technical challenge (score: 1): Author: "Paul J. Piercey" <p.piercey@nl.rogers.com>; Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 18:12:04 -0000; This is what made it more fun for me in the WPX contests. I probably never would have gotten my best score ever had I not been in a battle with another local op in the SSB contest and I may have pac; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-05/msg00317.html (11,194 bytes)
14. Re: [CQ-Contest] technical challenge (score: 1): Author: "Rick Tavan N6XI" <rtavan@gmail.com>; Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 18:21:43 -0700; Guilty. My QSO count and current score were posted correctly. My total QSO points was posted as total mults and my band breakdown was reported as all zeros. Most of the other funny looking entries lo; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-05/msg00407.html (9,454 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 14
Page: [1]