Dick Green writes:
>
> Note that I did not check over my log prior to submission. Now I know that's
> a mistake!
I dont think it is a mistake - I think that the idea of a
contest is to copy the information DURING the contest.
After all the whole point is to exchange information on the radio.
> I had a 3.8% error rate, which is pretty lame. But I was pleased to see that
> I only had four busted calls out of 1016 QSOs. Three of those were typical
>From the reports I have seen I would say that your error rate is
VERY good. Maybe Tree can tell us the distrbuttion in error rates
so that people can get an idea as to how they compare to others
in the contest.
> I copied 11 sections incorrectly. This is the one area I really could have
> fixed with a post-contest log check. Just about all of the errors were quite
> obvious miscopies that I could have detected by checking the callbook. There
> were a few bizarre ones that I can't explain, like NC->TN and OR->AK.
Again - I think that using the callbook is not in the
sprit of the contest. Besides that it has it's own problems.
People move around more than you might think.
> I'm using NA now, but I wasn't using it for this SS. It's Log Note feature
> could be a big help in SS, and I'm trying to force myself to log a note
> whenever I have any doubts about a QSO.
I think it would be better to ask for a fill if you have
doubts about a QSO.
I once asked K1ZZ how he managed to get such low error rates.
He told me that he asks for repeats if he has the slightest
doubt about what he copied. This in my mind is what we should
be working towards.
--
George Fremin III
Johnson City, Texas "Experiment trumps theory."
K5TR (ex.WB5VZL) -- Dave Leeson W6NL
geoiii@kkn.net
830-868-2510
http://www.kkn.net/~k5tr
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|