Just before the end of the RAC Winter Contest I worked a handful of
Eastern-Europeans in the Croatian CW Contest. I sent them 599 BC ###, they
sent me 599 ### and I happily put them in my log as I assume they did too.
If I were in the Stew I would've sent 599 CN79 BC.
Gabor, VE7JH
On 18/12/2016 15:07, Mike Smith VE9AA wrote:
> Any QSO's made with me last evening on 160m will NOT count as RAC contest
> contacts as I never once sent "NB", but only sent my grid square as I was
> doing the Stew Perry contest only.
>
> When I was running, I had a number of VE's send me their province and
when I
> replied with only my grid, they seemed quite happy to bag NB as a last
> minute mult on Top Band.
On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 6:01 PM, <cq-contest-request@contesting.com> wrote:
> Send CQ-Contest mailing list submissions to
> cq-contest@contesting.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> cq-contest-request@contesting.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> cq-contest-owner@contesting.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of CQ-Contest digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Stew Perry Preliminary Results (Tree)
> 2. Re: RAC Contest and 160m QSO's (VE2TZT)
> 3. Re: Stew Contest and Multi Op/packet (Ken K6MR)
> 4. Re: Stew Contest and Multi Op/packet (Mike Smith VE9AA)
> 5. Re: Observations of a young ham (Jim Stahl)
> 6. Re: Stew Contest and Multi Op/packet (Ken K6MR)
> 7. CQWW SSB DX Contest Need Help (Joe)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2016 14:50:44 -0800
> From: Tree <tree@kkn.net>
> To: 160 <topband@contesting.com>, "cq-contest@contesting.com"
> <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Stew Perry Preliminary Results
> Message-ID:
> <CAKF9HhaFrZTfeVG=XF2bNbNbWG5YobNvJZh97aSV8jPB5KfB0g@mail.
> gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Nice to see so much activity in the Stew Perry contest this weekend.
>
> We have received over 400 logs already and the preliminary results can be
> viewed here - http://www.kkn.net/stew/STEWSCR.TXT This will show how your
> score has improved from credit for working those low power and QRP
> stations.
>
> If you haven't sent in your log yet - please email it to
> tbdc@contesting.com
> or use the web upload page at http://www.b4h.net/cabforms/
> stewperry_cab.php
> (with thanks to WA7BNM).
>
> 73 Tree N6TR
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2016 18:55:22 -0500
> From: VE2TZT <ve2tzt@arrl.net>
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] RAC Contest and 160m QSO's
> Message-ID: <01e7a549-4d5c-385a-aeae-7fd106e66dd0@arrl.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
> On my point of view, If I am working the Stew and a RAC Winter contest
> guy calls me and gives me his grid plus his province, I will answer both
> being happy to log one more and make someone happy with a multiplier. If
> they give only the province but not the grid even after I asked them,
> that's an other question.
>
> If I just participated to the RAC Winter contest before switching to the
> Stew and already have a RAC winter contest log, that will not be a big
> deal, after the Stew contest, to add those few Contacts in my RAC log
> too for the RAC guys not having those QSO's NIL.
>
> It is just a question of flexibility versus rigidity.
>
> Gilles VA2EW
>
>
>
> On 18/12/2016 15:07, Mike Smith VE9AA wrote:
> > Any QSO's made with me last evening on 160m will NOT count as RAC contest
> > contacts as I never once sent "NB", but only sent my grid square as I was
> > doing the Stew Perry contest only.
> >
> > When I was running, I had a number of VE's send me their province and
> when I
> > replied with only my grid, they seemed quite happy to bag NB as a last
> > minute mult on Top Band.
> >
> >
> >
> > Sorry - doesn't work that way.
> >
> >
> >
> > Mike VE9AA
> >
> >
> >
> > Mike, Coreen & Corey
> >
> > Keswick Ridge, NB
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2016 00:08:03 +0000
> From: Ken K6MR <k6mr@outlook.com>
> To: Mike Smith VE9AA <ve9aa@nbnet.nb.ca>, "cq-contest@contesting.com"
> <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Stew Contest and Multi Op/packet
> Message-ID:
> <BN3PR13MB08173C2EFB0DF331CBA11FF29E910@BN3PR13MB0817.
> namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
>
> Mike:
>
>
>
> Rule 6. Seems pretty plain to me. Packet is not allowed for single op, and
> discouraged for Multi op. Local skimmers appear to be ok, but grudgingly.
>
>
>
> SP appears to be an attempt to hold on to ?Boy and his Radio? (copyright
> K0HB) contesting. Kinda like Stew did himself, as I read the history.
>
>
>
> Fine by me.
>
>
>
> Ken K6MR
>
>
>
> From: Mike Smith VE9AA<mailto:ve9aa@nbnet.nb.ca>
> Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2016 1:10 PM
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com<mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Stew Contest and Multi Op/packet
>
>
>
> The Stew Perry contest is not an ARRL event, so entering in Multi Op does
> not mean "Single Op + Packet"
>
> I was surprised at a few mini packet pileups I had last night. Now I know
> why.
>
>
>
> After reviewing the DX Cluster today and reading 3830 it's apparent nobody
> reads rules anymore.
>
>
>
> In all fairness, there were a couple guys using skimmer/telnet/cluster
> submitting properly as checklogs as they were chasing new countries or
> whatever.
>
>
>
> I would suggest to the Boring Club to clarify this point in the multi op
> rules. (ie: Multi Op does not mean Single Op + Packet).
>
>
>
> Mike VE9AA
>
>
>
> Mike, Coreen & Corey
>
> Keswick Ridge, NB
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2016 20:21:51 -0400
> From: "Mike Smith VE9AA" <ve9aa@nbnet.nb.ca>
> To: "'Ken K6MR'" <k6mr@outlook.com>, <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Stew Contest and Multi Op/packet
> Message-ID: <005201d2598d$e5e77de0$b1b679a0$@nbnet.nb.ca>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Agree 100% Ken. If you look at 3830 (which is only a fraction of the
> actual
> entrants) you'll see many multiops that only list one operator.(mostly the
> LP gang I think)
>
> True, I suppose its possible some of the fellows filling in the 3830 form
> simply forgot to list all the guys at the station that night. (unlikely,
> but
> could happen)
>
>
>
> Others, however, are apparently of the belief that a Multiop means single
> op
> + packet. (guess they never read the rules or are creating/justifying their
> own rules somehow in their mind)
>
>
>
> I certainly do not speak for the Boring ARC , nor the SP contest,. but if
> my
> ears are to be believed (packet pileups last night) along with 3830 posts
> and misinformed (but perhaps well intended) posts like the ones I see from
> W0MU, then it would appear at first glance that either folks are using
> packet and just putting themselves in a multiop category because they
> believe that's what they are supposed to do (per ARRL convention) or
> something else I have not yet thought of.
>
>
>
> Disappointed? Yes.
>
> Surprised? Sadly, no not really.
>
>
>
> Part of the problem may be the way the rules are written or they are
> becoming watered down. I snipped this from the logs rec'd page mere
> moments
> ago. Look for the word assisted:
>
>
>
> "2016 STEW PERRY
>
>
>
> This report generated on Sunday, 18-Dec-16 at 14:58.
>
>
>
>
>
> Total logs = 436
>
>
>
> C = Category (CheckLog, Multi or Single). ASSISTED classified as Multi.."
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Mike VE9AA FN66
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Mike, Coreen & Corey
>
> Keswick Ridge, NB
>
>
>
> From: Ken K6MR [mailto:k6mr@outlook.com]
> Sent: December 18, 2016 8:08 PM
> To: Mike Smith VE9AA; cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: RE: [CQ-Contest] Stew Contest and Multi Op/packet
>
>
>
> Mike:
>
>
>
> Rule 6. Seems pretty plain to me. Packet is not allowed for single op, and
> discouraged for Multi op. Local skimmers appear to be ok, but grudgingly.
>
>
>
> SP appears to be an attempt to hold on to "Boy and his Radio" (copyright
> K0HB) contesting. Kinda like Stew did himself, as I read the history.
>
>
>
> Fine by me.
>
>
>
> Ken K6MR
>
>
>
> From: Mike Smith VE9AA <mailto:ve9aa@nbnet.nb.ca>
> Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2016 1:10 PM
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Stew Contest and Multi Op/packet
>
>
>
> The Stew Perry contest is not an ARRL event, so entering in Multi Op does
> not mean "Single Op + Packet"
>
> I was surprised at a few mini packet pileups I had last night. Now I know
> why.
>
>
>
> After reviewing the DX Cluster today and reading 3830 it's apparent nobody
> reads rules anymore.
>
>
>
> In all fairness, there were a couple guys using skimmer/telnet/cluster
> submitting properly as checklogs as they were chasing new countries or
> whatever.
>
>
>
> I would suggest to the Boring Club to clarify this point in the multi op
> rules. (ie: Multi Op does not mean Single Op + Packet).
>
>
>
> Mike VE9AA
>
>
>
> Mike, Coreen & Corey
>
> Keswick Ridge, NB
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2016 19:24:47 -0500
> From: Jim Stahl <jimk8mr@aol.com>
> To: W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu@w0mu.com>
> Cc: "cq-contest@contesting.com" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Observations of a young ham
> Message-ID: <2A0233E4-EE35-45E6-B28D-0DEA2537DD41@aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> I suspect there is one factor missing from radiosport that kids and many
> others unfamiliar with it miss: defense. In nearly every other sport or
> game I can think of (golf and track are a few exceptions) you are not just
> trying to win, but trying to beat your opponent or opponents. And no,
> ?defending? your frequency from somebody trying to use it is not defense.
> Defense is doing something to prevent your opponent(s) from scoring.
>
> I don?t want anybody trying to stop me from scoring in Radiosport. But
> without it, the competition will seem pretty tame to the uninitiated.
>
>
> 73 - Jim K8MR
>
>
>
> > On Dec 18, 2016, at 12:42 PM, W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu@w0mu.com> wrote:
> >
> > I had the opportunity to talk to my son in more detail and ask him why
> contesting does not interest him. Here is what we discussed.
> >
> > 1. Cost to get in the game and have a chance to win is prohibitive.
> You need a great station, land, etc to really win or compete. The playing
> field is so unbalanced that it becomes a show stopper. For him he has no
> costs when at home. I consider my station modest with a 70 ft tower and
> land to put up Inv L's and full sized 80m verticals and some receiving
> antennas. I could do more but we have horses and they need to roam and are
> hell on things in the pasture.
> >
> > 2. You have to invest a lot of time to get good. If he can not have a
> really good station then why invest the time to get good if you are not
> going to be able to really compete.
> >
> > 2. The tools we use to contest, logging software, packet look like old
> dos programs. He called them ugly and boring. He is used to amazing
> graphics in games. I found this observation interesting. I feel that the
> tools we have are pretty good and give me what I want to see readily
> available. I was not expecting this answer.
> >
> > 3. He is far more interested in using packet where he can immediately
> chase things. Packet essentially gives him a list of things to do or
> goals. It is more visual so more interesting. He thought that more
> automated systems would be interesting. Young people and even us older
> folk expect things to happen much faster. They are the generation of
> instant satisfaction and some of that even rubs off on us older folk.
> >
> > 4. Talking to someone over the airwaves is still pretty cool. You can
> instantly talk around the world if the right condx exist, but we can talk
> all over the world with our phones so it is not as amazing as it once was.
> >
> > 5. CW is interesting but he was surprised that we don't have better code
> readers. While he would like to learn the code time is once again the
> factor. They have so many other outlets for entertainment that it is hard
> to find time for all of them.
> >
> > 6. Results take far too long to come out
> >
> > 7. He proposed that all participants use a scoreboard type system.
> Many of us have said this was something we need to do but have instead met
> with amazing resistance and a ton of excuses why people refuse to use it.
> A system where everyone can check it out and see what is going in in the
> contest. We are back to visuals.
> >
> > 6. Playing radio in the car driving is fun because there is not much
> else to do but drive.
> >
> > 7. He has his general license but he does not have the technical skills
> or electronic knowledge to build a shack or decent station. I am not a
> great teacher especially to my own kids so I take some of the blame for
> this but it is hard to teach people things when they don't want to devote
> much time to it. I feel a reluctance to even try to do something without
> having the proper knowledge. A far cry from when I was young and tried all
> sorts of silly antennas and projects that mostly failed miserably but boy
> did I learn from those mistakes.
> >
> > That pretty much summed up our hour long conversation and I am no closer
> to figuring out how to sell ham radio and contesting to them. I hope some
> will find this information helpful and interesting.
> >
> > W0MU
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2016 00:36:28 +0000
> From: Ken K6MR <k6mr@outlook.com>
> To: Mike Smith VE9AA <ve9aa@nbnet.nb.ca>, "cq-contest@contesting.com"
> <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Stew Contest and Multi Op/packet
> Message-ID:
> <BN3PR13MB0817B3413CC01CC9F76329419E910@BN3PR13MB0817.
> namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
>
> I think the ?Assisted as Multi? is Tree trying to be nice to people who
> don?t read rules. Rule 6 says (to me) that single op assisted is a check
> log. It says so right in Rule 6. You can put in the soapbox that you ran
> assisted and did it purposely for whatever reason.
>
> I didn?t CQ at all so didn?t have a sense of the pileups. But a few times
> when I found some odd DX station the pile built pretty quickly?
>
> Ken K6MR
>
> From: Mike Smith VE9AA<mailto:ve9aa@nbnet.nb.ca>
> Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2016 4:21 PM
> To: 'Ken K6MR'<mailto:k6mr@outlook.com>; cq-contest@contesting.com<mailto:
> cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Subject: RE: [CQ-Contest] Stew Contest and Multi Op/packet
>
> Agree 100% Ken. If you look at 3830 (which is only a fraction of the
> actual entrants) you?ll see many multiops that only list one
> operator.(mostly the LP gang I think)
> True, I suppose its possible some of the fellows filling in the 3830 form
> simply forgot to list all the guys at the station that night. (unlikely,
> but could happen)
>
> Others, however, are apparently of the belief that a Multiop means single
> op + packet. (guess they never read the rules or are creating/justifying
> their own rules somehow in their mind)
>
> I certainly do not speak for the Boring ARC , nor the SP contest,. but if
> my ears are to be believed (packet pileups last night) along with 3830
> posts and misinformed (but perhaps well intended) posts like the ones I see
> from W0MU, then it would appear at first glance that either folks are using
> packet and just putting themselves in a multiop category because they
> believe that?s what they are supposed to do (per ARRL convention) or
> something else I have not yet thought of.
>
> Disappointed? Yes.
> Surprised? Sadly, no not really.
>
> Part of the problem may be the way the rules are written or they are
> becoming watered down. I snipped this from the logs rec?d page mere
> moments ago. Look for the word assisted:
>
>
> ?2016 STEW PERRY
>
> This report generated on Sunday, 18-Dec-16 at 14:58.
>
>
> Total logs = 436
>
> C = Category (CheckLog, Multi or Single). ASSISTED classified as Multi?.?
>
>
>
>
> Mike VE9AA FN66
>
>
>
> Mike, Coreen & Corey
> Keswick Ridge, NB
>
> From: Ken K6MR [mailto:k6mr@outlook.com]
> Sent: December 18, 2016 8:08 PM
> To: Mike Smith VE9AA; cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: RE: [CQ-Contest] Stew Contest and Multi Op/packet
>
>
> Mike:
>
>
>
> Rule 6. Seems pretty plain to me. Packet is not allowed for single op, and
> discouraged for Multi op. Local skimmers appear to be ok, but grudgingly.
>
>
>
> SP appears to be an attempt to hold on to ?Boy and his Radio? (copyright
> K0HB) contesting. Kinda like Stew did himself, as I read the history.
>
>
>
> Fine by me.
>
>
>
> Ken K6MR
>
>
>
> From: Mike Smith VE9AA<mailto:ve9aa@nbnet.nb.ca>
> Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2016 1:10 PM
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com<mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Stew Contest and Multi Op/packet
>
>
> The Stew Perry contest is not an ARRL event, so entering in Multi Op does
> not mean "Single Op + Packet"
>
> I was surprised at a few mini packet pileups I had last night. Now I know
> why.
>
>
>
> After reviewing the DX Cluster today and reading 3830 it's apparent nobody
> reads rules anymore.
>
>
>
> In all fairness, there were a couple guys using skimmer/telnet/cluster
> submitting properly as checklogs as they were chasing new countries or
> whatever.
>
>
>
> I would suggest to the Boring Club to clarify this point in the multi op
> rules. (ie: Multi Op does not mean Single Op + Packet).
>
>
>
> Mike VE9AA
>
>
>
> Mike, Coreen & Corey
>
> Keswick Ridge, NB
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com<mailto:CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2016 18:54:11 -0600
> From: Joe <nss@mwt.net>
> To: "cq-contest@contesting.com" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] CQWW SSB DX Contest Need Help
> Message-ID: <88f53dc8-4d6b-2e91-4de8-580ce5a61878@mwt.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
> The Moderator of this list said it was OK to ask you any of your help.
>
> If you worked the 1980 CQWW SSB DX Contest,
>
> Please can you look in your log to see if you worked WB9SBD ?
>
> I am in the process of taking old paper logs, and getting into the
> computer.
>
> And I'm up to October of 1980 and this contest.
>
> Thing is, The times and dates seem all messed up and not in order. So I
> am trying to figure out what may have happened. but to do so, I need
> information to try to match things to.
>
> Like if I can get enough that worked me to tell be what they got in
> their logs, and I compare to what i got here, I my be able to figure out
> what I messed up when i wrote this on the log here.
>
> What is weird where in my log here times and dates re ll mesed up. the
> originals I sent in to CQ must have been OK because they accepted them,
> and I'm listed in the results as a valid log. And if I had sent in the
> mess I got here they surely would have trashed the log.
>
> so anyone?
>
> Joe WB9SBD
> --
> Sig
> The Original Rolling Ball Clock
> Idle Tyme
> Idle-Tyme.com
> http://www.idle-tyme.com
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of CQ-Contest Digest, Vol 168, Issue 44
> *******************************************
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|