On 13/04/2016 04:11, Radio K0HB wrote:
<snip>
Without overly belaboring the obvious, your success as a contester is
directly proportional how fast and accurately you can fill your log with
"good" exchanges. Lower accuracy = lower score.
So what useful purpose is served by the retribution imposed in the practice
of reducing the score further with an "additional penalty"?
"Additional penalties", as K0HB describes them, appear to be
applied more often to bust callsigns, rather than exchanges,
in a few contests - including CQWW.
One argument in favour of them is that, as in multiple choice
tests, they remove any reward for guessing - perhaps from a
SCP list, or from a bust spot where you did not wait to hear
the other station's callsign.
However, since such penalties apply equally to all entrants,
there can be no cause for complaint - especially as contest
sponsors are free to set their own scoring rules.
It's probably best to think of these rules as an incentive
for accurate logging.
73,
Paul EI5DI
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|