Yes, the "last 2" practice is an inefficient vestige of network dxing =
and dx lists. One certainty within contesting is that there will always =
be people doing things inefficiently mixed in with the top-notch =
contesters.
Highly efficient contest operation is about as comfortable for this =
inefficient sub-set of contesters as Indy car racing would have been for =
my grandmother. Leave them alone, and they will either give up on =
operating contest weekends, or they will develop into fine operators by =
following the example of the better operators that appear on the bands.
Whether it is a phone contest or a cw contest, efficient use of time is =
secondary to pile-up control. This is easy for me to say even though it =
flies in the face of conventional wisdom. Why? Because pile-up control =
is primary to efficient use of time, and RHYTHM is primary to pile-up =
control. If you allow any break from the primary RHYTHM then you will =
lose control of the pile-up. The "last 2" practice will only work under =
the following scenario:
DX: "Roger [dx callsign]"
Pileup: "##%@!*&[last 2]"
DX: "[last 2] 5908"
[last 2]: "[full call] 5905"
DX: "Roger [dx callsign]" or "[full call] Roger [dx callsign]"
If the DX station allows [last 2] to send complete his callsign before =
the final transmission of [last 2], then the following will occur:
DX: "Roger [dx callsign]"
Pileup: "##%@!*&[last 2]"
DX: "[last 2] What's your call?"
Pileup "#%@!*&[@!*&[lala]"
DX: "Please repeat your call"
Pileup "#%@!*&[@!*&[lala]"
DX: "@!damned*&%# bunch of lids! [last 2] only!!!"
Pileup =
"#%@!*&[@!*&[lala]#%@!*&[@!*&[lala]#%@!*&[@!*&[lala]#%@!*&[@!*&[lala]damn=
ed*&%# bunch of lids@!*&[@!*&[lala]#%@!*&[@!*&["
As I read the comments of the most prominent operators on this subject, =
I often hear them overlook the pileup control issue. This is because =
the most prominent operators achieve success and prominence through a =
great geographical location and great radiating structures. Under these =
operating conditions, pileup control is simplified; if your signal is =
louder than the pileup, you can lose control of the pileup and regain =
it.
The first scenario above is the desirable response to "last 2" callers. =
The negative impact of the practice is minimized...
------=_NextPart_000_000D_01BEDA13.9EDB0460
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3401" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Yes, the "last 2" practice is an inefficient vestige =
of=20
network dxing and dx lists. One certainty within contesting is =
that there=20
will always be people doing things inefficiently mixed in with the =
top-notch=20
contesters.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Highly efficient contest operation is about as =
comfortable for=20
this inefficient sub-set of contesters as Indy car racing would have =
been for my=20
grandmother. Leave them alone, and they will either give up on =
operating=20
contest weekends, or they will develop into fine operators by following =
the=20
example of the better operators that appear on the bands.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Whether it is a phone contest or a cw contest, =
efficient use=20
of time is secondary to pile-up control. This is easy for me =
to say=20
even though it flies in the face of conventional wisdom. =
Why? =20
Because pile-up control is primary to efficient use of time, and RHYTHM =
is=20
primary to pile-up control. If you allow any break from the =
primary=20
RHYTHM then you will lose control of the pile-up. The "last =
2"=20
practice will only work under the following scenario:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>DX: "Roger [dx callsign]"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Pileup: "##%@!*&[last 2]"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>DX: "[last 2] 5908"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>[last 2]: "[full call] 5905"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>DX: "Roger [dx callsign]" or "[full call] Roger [dx=20
callsign]"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>If the DX station allows [last 2] to send complete =
his=20
callsign before the final transmission of [last 2], then the following =
will=20
occur:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>DX: "Roger [dx callsign]"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Pileup: "##%@!*&[last 2]"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>DX: "[last 2] What's your call?"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Pileup "#%@!*&[@!*&[lala]"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>DX: "Please repeat your call"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Pileup "#%@!*&[@!*&[lala]"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>DX: "@!damned*&%# bunch of lids! [last 2]=20
only!!!"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Pileup=20
"#%@!*&[@!*&[lala]#%@!*&[@!*&[lala]#%@!*&[@!*&[la=
la]#%@!*&[@!*&[lala]damned*&%#=20
bunch of lids@!*&[@!*&[lala]#%@!*&[@!*&["</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>As I read the comments of the most prominent =
operators on this=20
subject, I often hear them overlook the pileup control issue. This =
is=20
because the most<STRONG> </STRONG>prominent operators achieve success =
and=20
prominence through a great geographical location and great radiating=20
structures. Under these operating conditions, pileup control is=20
simplified; if your signal is louder than the pileup, you can lose =
control of=20
the pileup and regain it.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>The first scenario above is the desirable response =
to "last 2"=20
callers. The negative impact of the practice is=20
minimized...</FONT></DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_000D_01BEDA13.9EDB0460--
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|