>Seems to me Dave, WX3N's idea was a good one about earlier
>publishing of claimed scores, etc.
>
>I have also wondered about a volunteer group of ACTIVE
>contesters who get to view the write-up/results BEFORE
>they are cast in concrete, to look for obvious mistakes
>(like lost guest ops, missing scores, etc.). Doubt they'll catch
>all the errors, but they are bound to catch most of the "biggies".
>
>73
>Jeff KR0Y
Case and point: 1994 IARU results
After having a first place score turned into a last place published effort,
(they dropped a very significant 0 _and_ listed me in the wrong category)
I was quite...ahem...perturbed (gentlemanly for _really_ pissed).
In addition, I was a guest op at K3ANS, and indicated such on the summary
sheet and .SUM file. This too was omitted. Believe it or not all of the
above items were even highlighted in flourescent pink on my summary sheet.
I figured it's make it easier for someone to read the "vital" details.
The only thing they got right was my section.
Included in that same article is a correction from the prior year's
contest. The ARRL dropped a _very_ significant "1" from an HA multi score.
Unfortunatelty for them that "1" was 1 MILLION points. A world class score
flushed down the toilet.
This is not CQ. They are volunteers, and I commend their efforts. This is
the ARRL. These folks are paid. I think there is a reasonable expectation
for a higher level of accuracy and professionalism.
Is there no reason why "claimed scores" can't be released for ARRL
contests? They are obviously on the net. There is obviously sufficient lead
time to spot major guffaws since the results must be available for the
person to do the commentary (perhaps Randy can comment on this).
Would it take an awful lot of time and effort to post them? I kind of doubt
it since they must already be in electronic form prior to publication. A
quick upload.
Am I proposing something too far-fetched? You tell me.
Comments from the ARRL Contest Branch and/or CAC reps would be very
enlightening.
73, John - WB2K
------------------------------------------------------------------
John A. Ross, IV - WB2K / VE2TJA [Zone 2] (wb2k@ritz.mordor.com)
Summit, New Jersey
Contest DXpedition Registry ---------> http://www.mordor.com/wb2k
------------------------------------------------------------------
>From Matthew S. Trott" <0007288678@mcimail.com Sat Apr 15 23:30:00 1995
From: Matthew S. Trott" <0007288678@mcimail.com (Matthew S. Trott)
Subject: squINT
Message-ID: <62950415223026/0007288678PJ1EM@MCIMAIL.COM>
AA7BG Multi-op
Soapbox:
Mattie(Age 8)--"I thought it was good training if you're gonna be a radio
person."
Aaron (Age 6)--"It was fun."
Jenna Rose (Age 3)--"I thought it was pretty good, but I didn't like the
kids."---Well that's what she said.
Score: 22 Q's and 12 mults x 3 ops=792 points
Highlights: Had a good run of 9's at 1830. Worked a 57 near the end.
Jenna used 46 for her age several times for some unbeknownst
reason. She also mentioned 4 or 5 colors everytime as her favorite
color.
Breakdown:
three 5's one 12
one 6 one 13
two 7's one 14
two 8's one 41
three 9's one 57
four 10's
one 11
I think the one hour format for this contest is just about right if not
a little too long. Jenna and Aaron began dissassembling the station with about
15 minutes left. Between helping Mattie operate and keeping these other two
from pulling wires, unplug
ging stuff, and turning knobs it was a real challenge.
I see soime super ops coming in the not too distant future some of you guys
are doing a GREAT job of coaching.
When's the CW weekend?
73, Mattie, Aaron, Jenna---------AA7BubbleGum
aa7bg@mcimail.com
>From Patrick Collins <pcollins@freenet.columbus.oh.us> Sat Apr 15 23:40:54
>1995
From: Patrick Collins <pcollins@freenet.columbus.oh.us> (Patrick Collins)
Subject: SS results
Message-ID: <Pine.3.07.9504151854.A28025-b100000@acme>
I guess multi-multi is an allowed category is phone SS now.
>On Thu, 24 Nov 1994 09:15:42 anoymous wrote
>well it was wx0b.
>Like I said they seemed surprised when it was brought to their
>attention and I didn't wait around to see how it turned out. This
>was the only instance I heard and it was a fluke that I heard it at
>all. I had just tuned the band fron top to botton on 40 and they
>were on like 7153. Then hit the vfo b button which was on 75 and
>it came up on the last freq I was on (about 3754) and wow there
>they were again. So I started swapping VFOs and found
>simultaneous transmissions, ie. two CQs at once, calling CQ while
>giving the exchange on the other band.
>So I don't know..............
>On 22 Dec 1994 16:21:27 WX0B wrote
>We, Na5q, al7cq,and I have already made the call to Billy Lundt to discuss
>this. I would also like to discuss it with you so that you know what we were
>doing.
>I also would like to know how you kept S/N's straight since we couldn't get
>CT9.10a from trashing them on the network.
>This was really a pain, and will be a topic that Billy and I will decide what
>to do as well since our log numbers are probably inacurate as well.
>We do use a lock out but not as good as yours it seems. I have a new one on
>the drawing board which will use the rigs send sig. So next year we will be
>"totally" automatic vs manual.
If this is not cheating and in violation of the rules than I don't know
what is. I can only conclude that WX0B should have been disqualified on
CW and SSB.
Pat nz4k
|