[NLRS] ARRL September VHF Results - Final de KA0RYT

Fri Feb 7 17:22:48 EST 2014

Hello and Many Tnx to Jon , JK , Zack , and Paul !!! I appreciate the clearly explained actions regarding the scoring as well as allowing me to figure out what is going on with my particular score .... It looks like I lost 3 QSOs ( +3 QSO point loss penalty ) and that caused my  6 QSO LOSS AND 3 MULT. LOSS ......      Alrighty , then !!       Again Thanks to all  for the input and help w/ my 'learning curve' .  73s !!! Ron KA0RYT

 Cc: "NLRS reflector" <nlrs at mailman.qth.net>
 Date: Friday, February 7, 2014, 4:00 PM

 Ron, each of the calls you cited had very small
 entries, and they obviously
 got hit by
 logging error penalties which take away QSO's. 
 Depending on the
 type of error, you may not
 just lose the contact, but lose one or more
 additional contacts as a penalty.  So, in a
 small log where almost every
 contact is a
 multiplier, you can end up with fewer contacts than
 multipliers.  It looks really strange, and
 might make more sense if they
 listed the
 valid contacts, and just made the correction in the total
 score.
  But that would mess up simple
 calculation of who had the best scores on
 individual bands.

 N0JK has a particularly interesting score:  -1
 QSOs x 0 grids = 0 total
 points!

 This time I lost one Q because
 I was not in K1TEO's log;  I thought I
 completed with him on scatter, but apparently
 not.  You also get to see who
 goofed up
 your entry in their log;  it is always interesting to see
 someone
 log me as EN35 (my QRZ.com grid)
 rather than EN44 (my only operating QTH
 for
 years).  Every contest I also have someone trying to copy
 me and asking
 "is that EN35?".  I
 don't think 35 sounds very much like 44!

 73
 Paul
 W0UC

 On
 Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Ronald Bergantzel <ka0ryt1 at yahoo.com>
 wrote:

 >
 >
 > Hello !! Thanks for
 letting us know that the ARRL had released the results
 > ..... After some initial reading of the
 article as well as the line by line
 >
 scores it brings to thought a few questions that I have for
 the NLRS
 > group........  First , what
 mistakes or errors did I do to get my score
 > changed ?? It went from 102 QSOs X 52
 Multipliers [with 85 X 39 on 144] to
 > 96
 QSOs X 49 Multipliers [ with 81 X 37 on 144 ] ( as
 calculated by
 > RoverLog here ) ???? 
 Also , how do contest entries get more Multipliers
 > than QSOs ???? Just look at the Line
 scores - particularly N0JK , KM4ID  ,
 >  KF6CVA , KA3KSP , and KB0KBJ
 ......   Now , I realise that my score could
 > have been affected by probable accidental
 log entry errors on my part
 > and/or
 accidental or intentional log entry errors on others'
 part   , but
 > how do you get
 more Multipliers without having a QSO with them ?? Food
 for
 > thought - Anyway , I have been
 busy  working on upping the ERP from the
 > farm as well as
 > 
 adding another band and building extra LNAs for the new band
 as we speak
 > . 73s and Keep Warm !! 
 Ron KA0RYT - EN35ct
 >
 --------------------------------------------
 > On Thu, 2/6/14, w0zq at aol.com <w0zq at aol.com>
 wrote:
 >
 >  Subject:
 [NLRS] ARRL September VHF Results
 >  To:
 nlrs at mailman.qth.net
 >  Date: Thursday, February 6, 2014, 12:56
 PM
 >
 >
 >
 >
 >  Hello NLRS land -
 >
 >  The September VHF
 contest results are
 > 
 posted.   Congratulations to the following
 >  stations for their Top Ten national
 finish:
 >
 >  W0UC 
         7th place SOHP
 >  K9MU   
       2nd place SO3B
 >  W9FZ/R 
    10th place Rover (editorial
 >  comment - 5th place)
 >  K0BBC/R     9th place
 Limited Rover
 >
 > 
 Looking at just Dakota Division, congratulations to the
 >  following stations for their top
 divisional finish:
 >
 >  W0JT           SOLP
 >  K0AWU       SOHP
 >  NI0W            SOP
 >  N0AT            SO3B
 >  KC0P/R       Rover
 >  K0BBC/R    Limited Rover
 >
 >  Our club score was
 down this year placing 10th out of 15
 > 
 clubs in the Medium Category.  This may have been due
 >  in part to three other clubs and their
 excellent scores -
 >  Badger Contesters
 1st, CVVHF 3rd and Rochester (MN) 6th out
 >  of nine clubs in the Local category. 
 With this we had
 >  four VHF+ clubs
 participating regionally.
 >
 >  My apologies to anyone that I may have
 missed.
 >
 >  73,
 Jon
 >  W0ZQ
 > 
 ______________________________________________________________
 >  NLRS mailing list
 > 
 Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/nlrs
 >  Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
 >  Post: mailto:NLRS at mailman.qth.net
 >
 >  This list hosted
 by: http://www.qsl.net
 >  Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
 >
 >
 ______________________________________________________________
 > NLRS mailing list
 >
 Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/nlrs
 > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
 > Post: mailto:NLRS at mailman.qth.net
 >
 > This list hosted by:
 http://www.qsl.net
 >
 Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
 >
 ______________________________________________________________
 NLRS mailing list
 Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/nlrs
 Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
 Post: mailto:NLRS at mailman.qth.net

 This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
 Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html