Perfect Stan!
Dave AFP
On Tue, Jan 7, 2020 at 11:07 AM Stanley Zawrotny <k4sbz.stan@gmail.com>
wrote:
> People need to update their mindset about dupes. The do NOT give you a
> penalty. Also, do not remove dupes from your log.....several contests now
> state that.
>
> Consider....You work Someone, but he logs you wrong or just forgets to log
> you. He then calls you again an hour later. If you tell him it’s a dupe,
> 1. You break your rhythm
> 2. You don’t get credit for him
> 3. You DO get a NIL for your entry and ARE penalized for your NIL
>
> However, if you do log him again
> 1. You both get credit for the second QSO. (That’s why you shouldn’t
> remove what you think is a dupe from your log.
> 2. Most contests ignore dupes.
> 3. Most contests will “almost-match” with callsigns that are close. They
> won’t give you credit, but they also don’t penalize you with a NIL.
>
> I have had people tell me that their logger won’t allow dupes. Bull! Most
> loggers have settings to allow dupes. Do everyone a favor and correct your
> settings before the next contest.
>
> Contest ebulliently!
>
> Stan, K4SBZ
>
> "Real radio bounces off the sky."
>
> > On Jan 7, 2020, at 9:30 AM, Joe <nss@mwt.net> wrote:
> >
> > In the back of my mind I remember the penalty was severe also for
> working a dupe.
> >
> > I don't know if it was true or not, it is 40+ years ago after-all, But I
> remember of course you lost the credit of the dupe contact, but I also
> remember you were penalized by they removed the QSO before and after the
> dupe!
> >
> > So you lost the dupe points and even possibly two more contacts that
> even could have been mults even!
> >
> > Joe WB9SBD
> > Sig
> > The Original Rolling Ball Clock
> > Idle Tyme
> > Idle-Tyme.com
> > http://www.idle-tyme.com
> >> On 1/6/2020 11:14 PM, Edward Sawyer wrote:
> >> The "no dupes" came from the fact that it was very difficult to weed
> the dupes out of the logs back before computerized logging. So "loading up
> on dupes" was a way of "padding the log" and was penalized early on in the
> score keeping. Today the reverse is true.
> >>
> >> The days of sending with one hand and paper logging and dupe sheeting
> with the other are long gone too.
> >>
> >> Ed N1UR
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces+edwards=
> sbelectronics.com@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Blaine
> >> Sent: Monday, January 6, 2020 9:55 PM
> >> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> >> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] The legacy of not working dupes
> >>
> >> It was pretty funny Mike. But unfortunately in a "watch me shoot my
> >> foot" sort of way. I got into contesting way too late and missed
> >> whatever it was that drove the no-dupes obsession back in the day. Must
> >> have had something to do with paper logging or labor or something like
> >> that. I'm sure there was a good reason the practice got started.
> >> Clearly that original momentum has plenty of legs even now when it seems
> >> the no-dupe thing is actually bad for biz.
> >>
> >> 73/jeff/ac0c
> >> alpha-charlie-zero-charlie
> >> www.ac0c.com
> >>
> >>
> >>> On 1/6/20 6:17 PM, Mike Smith VE9AA wrote:
> >>> Jeff,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Like you, I always work dupes. I work very little RTTY, but in the
> bigger
> >>> CW contests, there always seem to be a very small # of EU's that will
> work
> >>> me 2, 3 or even 7 times. I can only surmise they trawl up and down the
> >>> bottom end of 20m working the stronger NA stations to 'help them out'
> in the
> >>> contest and are probably are not using a logging program. I had to
> tell one
> >>> guy one time after the 5th or 6th QSO in an hour or so "No more!"
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I loved the "don't think so" you got. I found that very funny (and
> very sad
> >>> at the same time) (if that makes sense.)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> That'd be a new one on me. Mike VE9AA
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> "..I was S&P and called a guy that had apparently worked me - but was
> not in
> >>> my log. I got the "BEFORE" reply which I get a few times each contest
> and
> >>> for that case, I have a short macro that says "NIL - plz work again".
> And
> >>> to my complete amazement the guy sent a reply - apparently typed by
> hand as
> >>> the pace was a bit slower than normal macro exchange speed - "dont
> think
> >>> so." Wow, never had someone tell me that. So the net result of
> this is
> >>> he lost a point because he's not in my log and that will pop in the
> cross
> >>> check. And we must have wasted a minute or two doing the dance. Good
> move
> >>> all around, OM! .."
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> alpha-charlie-zero-charlie
> >>>
> >>> www.ac0c.com
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Mike, Coreen & Corey
> >>>
> >>> Keswick Ridge, NB
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> 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
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|