Bob,
I got one better- how about EEEE for a report? Why do you bother with zone 4
when the argument is that the robot determines your zone anyway?
73, Albert
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Chudek - K0RC
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 5:01 AM
To: CQ-Contest@contesting.com
Subject: [CQ-Contest] dit dit dit
I have contest logs from the '60s where RST was sent as a variable, a
real world guesstimate about the strength of the station you were
working. This was 'pre computer' days.
Later, with the introduction of CT, NA, TR, etc RSTs became pretty much
set in stone as 599, even when you needed 4 repeats to get the QSO logged.
Enter cut numbers... 599 then became 5NN and more recently ENN.
Now with the latest revelation that RSTs are not cross-checked, there's
opportunity to improve the exchange efficiency even further. I just
reprogrammed my macros with EEE4.
If I'm reading the threads right, Zone doesn't really matter either so
it looks like EEEE(tm) is the next logical step.
Dang, I have to wait almost a full year to test this out... or maybe not!
73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|