Thank you Howard, my sentiments exactly.
I questioned the ARRL many years ago on this issue,
the short answer is it's our problem.
It's up to all of us to log every contact accurately,
so stations we work won't get "punished" by our mistakes.
I gave up on HF CW contests, 35 WPM is way beyond my ability.
P.S. I see WSJT-X will soon include a new SuperCW mode,
maybe it will help increase CW activity on VHF.
I just hope they don't run it at 50 WPM.
73 Ron WZ1V
----- Original Message -----
From: Howard Reynolds <wa3eoq@gmail.com>
To: vhfcontesting@contesting.com
Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2026 20:46:22 -0400
Subject: [VHFcontesting] ARRL Contest Scoring Discrepancies
> I quit complaining about this several years ago when: I worked a station on
> 1296MHz a few hundred miles out for a new grid. I even received a QSL card
> from him a few days later. However, when the results came out; I was NIL
> as the op didn't log the QSO when he sent in the logs. The QSL
> confirmation made no difference. THEN, I was NIL when I worked a limited
> rover who worked me on 1296MHz but their logging submission wouldn't let
> them submit that QSO.
>
> On HF, I just wish many cw ops would just SLOW DOWN. Sending 35+wpm just
> makes for more copying errors. Besides, on Sunday afternoon, these same
> ops are sending CQ TEST ad nauseum. Why not just send around 25 wpm and
> spread out your contacts? I would really like to be able to copy cw
> faster, however, I have other things to do than sit in front of the radio
> for hours on end.
>
> At least on VHF/UHF all cw ops have the sense to slow down to match another
> station's speed or when the going gets tough. WA3EOQ
> _______________________________________________
> VHFcontesting mailing list
> VHFcontesting@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
>
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|