To: | CQ-Contest@contesting.com |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Don't we need to change the sprint protocol? |
From: | "John WA2GO" <xnewyorka@hotmail.com> |
Date: | Sat, 18 Sep 2004 13:28:28 -0400 |
List-post: | <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com> |
Call me old-fashioned, or even a "purist", but I think the idea of getting
fills for YOUR QSO by listening to somebody ELSE's QSO are slightly off the
mark. As far as I'm concerned, that violates the spirit of any contest,
Sprint or otherwise. If YOU didn't successfully make the QSO, you shouldn't
claim it in your log. To me, the definition of a successful QSO is: 1) I believe I copied the other station's exchange correctly. 2) I believe the other station copied my exchange correctly. I will only log the QSO if both conditions are met. (That's why it says "Confirming TWO-WAY QSO With ___" on QSL cards, right?) I won't "let somebody go" until I am sure I copied his exchange correctly. In my younger days, if I missed something, I would try hanging around waiting for him to make another QSO so I could copy a missed element of an exchange without having to "bother" him for a repeat. This turned out to be a huge waste of time, and largely unfruitful. Often times, I would get stuck listening to several CQ's before he got an answer, sometimes he would QSY first without getting a call, or sometimes (when my luck was really bad), I would miss the same element of his exchange AGAIN due to QRM, QRN, or my own incompetence, thus wasting yet more time. So what are the best ways to catch somebody's attention to let them know you need a fill? The two best ways are: 1) Send the ERROR signal (a string of 8 dits) followed by your inquiry e.g. ........ nr? 2) Send the I HAVE A QUESTION signal (a question mark) followed by your inquiry e.g. ?nr or ?nr? Either of these should let him know right away to stick around because there is a problem. (As was pointed out, even in the Sprint he may or may not stick around.) If you're a great op, and the radio gods are always on your side, you may never have to ask for a fill, and this issue doesn't apply to you. But if you are a mere mortal like me, and you occasionally miss an item, your rates may end up a little lower if you ask for fills rather than copying them from the guy's next QSO. But if you're like me, you'll have a good conscience and a great sense of satisfaction when you submit a log knowing that all of your claimed QSOs were actual TWO-WAY QSO's. Nobody else but you is going to know what you copied during your QSOs and what you didn't, so it's strictly a matter of honor. To me, that's always been one of the appealing aspects of this great hobby of ours... 73, John WA2GO p.s. If somebody asks YOU for a fill, make sure you send them the right serial number, not the next one! :-) From: "Michael Tope" <W4EF@dellroy.com> To: "Dale Martin" <kg5u@hal-pc.org>, <cq-contest@contesting.com> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Don't we need to change the sprint protocol? Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 21:54:42 -0700 _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | [CQ-Contest] world champs looking for operator, David Robbins K1TTT |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Don't we need to change the sprint protocol?, Doug Smith W9WI |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Don't we need to change the sprint protocol?, Jim Rhodes |
Next by Thread: | [CQ-Contest] SSB Sprint Practice - Friday, Dean Wood |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |