Comments from Disqualified Entrants
This page contains public statements made by the entrants disqualified from WRTC 2026.
RW7K
From email to wrtc-2026-discuss@groups.io date 9/13/2026 2:33PM EDST.
I, Andy, RW7K, want to make one thing absolutely clear: what happened with the ten nonexistent multipliers in the MB5Q log was my responsibility. I fully accept the Judging Committee’s findings and the consequences of my actions. I do not dispute the evidence, and I have no excuse or justification for what happened.
All recordings and evidence relating to these contacts came from my operating position and my audio recording. None of these multipliers appeared in contacts logged by KU1CW. Alex was completely unaware that these nonexistent multipliers had been entered into the log and had not listened to my audio recording until the Judging Committee provided excerpts as part of its investigation.
Therefore, KU1CW had nothing to dispute or explain. He simply had no knowledge of these contacts or the nonexistent multipliers until the evidence was presented to him. The MB5Q log and audio also confirm that all of these contacts were associated with the radio where I, RW7K, was operating.
I understand and accept the principle that disqualification applies to teams, not individuals. I am not challenging that principle or asking for the team’s disqualification to be treated differently. However, when explaining how and why the disqualification occurred, I believe it is important that the individual roles are described accurately and clearly. The evidence shows that these actions came from my operating position and that Alex was not involved in creating or logging any of these nonexistent multipliers.
I accept full personal responsibility for my actions and for the consequences they caused. I am not asking anyone to excuse what I did.
At the same time, this situation raises a serious and legitimate question about the role of the referee.
There were 10 incidents, occurring at different times over an extended period, with clearly recorded exchanges. The question is: what kind of monitoring was being performed by the referee during that period, and why did none of these contacts trigger detection by the referee?
That question matters because detection of even one of these incidents could potentially have stopped the behavior from continuing and might have prevented the eventual DQ — something I obviously very much regret.
I would genuinely like to understand how 10 such simple incidents could occur over an extended period without being detected during the contest, and what monitoring or safeguards were in place — or absent — that allowed this to continue.
I am not trying to shift responsibility for my actions to anyone else. The responsibility for what I did remains entirely mine. However, I believe it is a legitimate question to ask how the monitoring system failed to detect any of these incidents while they were occurring.
There is also a separate question regarding Rule 12.7. I would appreciate clarification on how the terms “excessive unverifiable QSOs” and “excessive unverifiable multipliers” are defined and applied in practice.
What number or percentage of a team’s total QSOs or multipliers is considered “excessive”? Is there an established numerical threshold, percentage, or other objective criterion used by the Judging Committee.
I believe clarification of this point would be useful for all competitors and for the contesting community, particularly in understanding how Rule 12.7 is interpreted and applied.
Most importantly, I sincerely apologize to Alex, my teammate, for putting him in this position and damaging his reputation through my actions. I also apologize to our competitors, the WRTC organizers and Judging Committee, and the entire contesting community for the damage I caused to the integrity of the competition.
I would especially like to apologize to SV5DKL, who is a personal friend of KU1CW. My actions compromised not only the competition, but also a personal friendship. For that, I am deeply sorry.
I fully understand the seriousness of what I have done and the damage it has caused. I offer my sincere and unconditional apologies to everyone affected.
Andy, RW7K
KU1CW
From email to wrtc-2026-discuss@groups.io date 9/1/2026 6:44PM EDST.
For the past 10–15 years, I have been one of the strongest, and probably loudest, opponents of cheerleading, cheating, and other forms of manipulation in WRTC. Ironically, I ended up on a DQ team.
I was actually the first to clearly raise the issue of “MULT Farming” at WRTC2026 — only to discover later that it had occurred on my own team as well.
As for our DQ, I would like to make one thing absolutely clear: I had nothing whatsoever to do with the “invented” multipliers and learned about them only after the judges revealed them. Apparently, I was the last to know. 🙁
The logs and evidence presented to us establish several important facts:
- All 10 of these contacts were recorded by our TL on R2.
- There is no indication in the evidence presented that the multipliers were supplied by another outside operator.
- Based on the available evidence, the recordings appear to have originated solely from the R2 operator, with no outside assistance and no evidence presented of a conspiracy prior to WRTC.
- R1 received no “moved mults,” and none of these multipliers appeared in the R1 log.
- The 10 incidents were not a single isolated occurrence; they took place over a significant period of time.
- In each case, F2 and F3 were played and a QSO was clearly recorded, but the recording contains no corresponding transmission from the supposed MULT station.
There is no excuse for what happened.
What concerns and greatly disappoints me most is therefore not only that these incidents occurred, but that none of the 10 apparently false,clearly recorded and empty-air MULT QSOs was detected during the contest.
I was listening exclusively to my own radio and had no way of monitoring what was happening on R2. I therefore cannot claim to know what the referee heard or saw at the time.
But this raises a serious and legitimate question:
Given the number of incidents, the period over which they occurred (look at the snapshot attached), and the nature of the clearly recorded exchanges, what monitoring was being performed by the referee during this period, and why did none of these contacts trigger detection or intervention before the behavior was repeated?
That matters because detection of even one of these incidents could potentially have stopped the behavior from continuing and might have prevented the eventual DQ — something I obviously very much regret.
I would genuinely like to understand how 10 such incidents could occur over an extended period without being detected during the contest, and what monitoring or safeguards were in place that allowed this to continue.
73,
Alex KU1CW / MB5Q”
E77DX
From email to wrtc-2026-discuss@groups.io date 9/1/2026 1:27PM EDST.
We made mistake and it was clearly confirmed in my (our) to JC, where was confirmed that the act was reason for disqualification.
Yes i was expecting to be DQ for violating the rule of ID, there is no excuse for that.
First thing i offered when the decision was confirmed is how and where to return price we received.
It is up on you up on you as well on others to take my apologies or not. I can’t do more or les.
Best regards
VE3DZ
From email to wrtc-2026-discuss@groups.io date 7/25/2026 9:50AM EDST.
I have become aware that questions about alleged “fake mults” in our team’s LOG (and other LOGs) have been raised, and the Judging Committee is conducting its review.
As the participant of many previous WRTC’s I have always believed that WRTC should be conducted on a fair and level playing field. I take this matter very seriously and full cooperation and any additional information have been offered to JC from my side.
As the review is still ongoing, and out of respect to the review process I believe it would be inappropriate for me and my partner to comment or draw any conclusion before the Organizing Committee completes its work. We believe that we competed in good faith and will leave the assessment of the facts to the Judging Committee.
We are confident that the JC will carefully consider all relevant facts and evidence, and we will respect whatever decision the JC reaches.
Thank you.
Yuri VE3DZ
From email to wrtc-2026-discuss@groups.io date 9/1/2026 11:44PM EDST.
I said it before that I was shocked and disturbed by what happened and feel sorry that perfectly organized WRTC was spoiled by this in the end.
Like I stated earlier, I would accept any decision by the Judging Committee. DQ’s harsh, but so be it.
I would gladly apologize (like Braco) – but only if someone would explain to me WHAT EXACTLY I PERSONALLY HAVE DONE WRONG???I was making contacts, I didn’t send any extra characters or did anything else that could be considered as a “handshake” to violate rule 12.2…
I realize that JC and SC want to make a case out of it in order to preserve the future of WRTC, and it’s understandable. But after being DQ’d (for the first time in my life!) I would expect at least a note from the JC… I don’t know – some kind of elaboration … Especially after the fact that concern about some “funny calls” in our LOG was raised on Monday in conversation with of one the members of JC.
Maybe admitting that the judging process was not done on the corresponding level? If 3 perfect QSOs with 3 new mults are being removed from the LOG only because the other party busted not one, but 2 letters in your call, then maybe something isn’t quite right with the judging software which is supposed to be the best? Maybe now (finally) the judges would start listening to the recordings?
I’m not trying to blame JC, but taking some small responsibility wouldn’t hurt in this case IMO.
Obviously, I am very upset and in despair now to see how my reputation goes down the drain, and people start offering anything from “ban for life” or “shoot without prosecution” (by our “eastern european friends”) to “we will never work these guys in the contests again”…
There is a paragraph in JC’s statement “Disqualification Applies to the Teams, Not Individuals”, but nobody reads it.
I tried to read the 11-page statement few times, but the more I read it, the more questions I have.
I was the “guilty party” who made that first contact on 14003.6. According to the JC report, the frequency was not in use for at least 36 seconds before the start of the Contest after EU8E finished his last QSO on 14003.5 . When radio was turned On at exactly 12:00, I jumped on what I saw on the waterfall like a clear frequency and called CQ. I was called by EU8E. It was a perfect QSO, without any suspicious “extra dots” or other signs of “revealing ID” or 2-factor verification” from my side. Why would then EU8E call me if he was allegedly keeping the frequency for me? And according to the spots there were at least 2 other MB stations started the Contest around that frequency (I may provide details).Okay, if EU8E allegedly held the frequency for us, why the hell he would call me right away? And then made no other Q’s in the Contest. It’s so stupid and suspicious.
Another question. The case with EU8E was treated by JC as ” Section 12.2 violation: “Team Identity Revealed to Others”. Then why the pirate waited for more than 2 hours to make more than 1 contact with us: “MB2M’s first pirate contact was HL2CFY at 12:46z on 14003 kHz, the frequency it was running. Its next came at 14:08z” (from JC report), while MB2A had already 8 Q’s with fake mults in their LOG by 14:00?
And if there was another (different) station who – allegedly – held the frequency for MB2A (EV6M) – why it didn’t call MB2A, like EU8E called us? What’s the logic here?
According to the above, if there were 2 different stations holding 2 different frequencies for MB2A and MB2M, why then later it became obvious that there was only one station who was feeding participants with fake mults, doing so in sequence and groups of same calls, one following after another? Why not 2 stations doing it simultaneously using different fake calls?Many, many other questions… including very important one on how it happened that the pirate gave only one multiplier to the closest competitors of MB2M – MB5O? Obviously that team was identified too, but how, if the MB5O team allegedly never revealed their identity?
And the fact that some UA9 guy confessed on russian forum that he knew all operators behind each MB call by the 2nd hour, was it addressed?
We had a very skilled referee, who listened to our operation for 24 hours, and I still believe that we were a pretty strong team which was capable of making into the Top 5 without any “help” from outside. Our operation was immaculate, judging by the recordings.
I also consider my partner UW7LL innocent until proved otherwise.
As we see here, even some big mouth accuser may quickly turn into a guilty party. I wouldn’t start blaming anybody personally without having a solid evidence of guilt.
I also want to publicly thank some of my friends (not so many as I expected) who offered me their support and help at this difficult time, knowing that I wouldn’t do something stupid like “organizing” fake mults and risking my reputation and 50+ years contest career.
You know who you are. Thank you.
Yuri VE3DZ
From email to wrtc-2026-discuss@groups.io date 9/9/2026 1:03PM EDST.
The dust has settled somewhat since the publication of the WRTC-2026 report on September 1st, and I would like to clarify my initial, rather emotional, response which I posted to this group shortly after the report was released.
I fully understand the seriousness of what occurred at WRTC-2026 and the damage such conduct causes to the integrity of our sport. I also understand why the findings and the resulting disqualifications have generated such strong reactions within the amateur radio community.
Having said that, I want to state my own position as clearly and unequivocally as I can.
I did not arrange, authorize, request, or knowingly participate in any scheme intended to reveal our team identity or fraudulently improve our score.
I had no prior knowledge of any such arrangement before or during the competition.After learning what had happened, I voluntarily offered my full cooperation and assistance to the Judging Committee. I provided analysis, suggestions, files and other information which, I hope, assisted in examining additional irregularities at WRTC-2026 that had not been identified during the initial review.
I have accepted the Judging Committee’s decision to disqualify MB2M because I was a member of that team. I am not asking for that decision to be reversed, nor am I attempting to avoid the consequences that properly apply to the team.
But there is a fundamental distinction between accepting the consequences of being a member of a disqualified team and admitting personal responsibility for conduct that I did not commit and of which I was unaware.
This is not a distinction I have created for my own defense. The WRTC report itself expressly states:
“Although different members of the teams may bear different responsibility for actions resulting in disqualification, it should be noted that the disqualifications apply to the teams, not to individual team members.”
I believe those words are important and should not be overlooked when assessing the conduct and responsibility of any individual operator.
The report identifies MB2M, consisting of VE3DZ and UW7LL, as disqualified under Rule 12.2. However, the published report does not make a finding that I personally arranged the frequency transfer, knew about it beforehand, or participated in the outside activity described in the report.
That has been, and remains, my position.
I did not transmit any coded exchange, any additional character, or other signal intended as a “handshake” or means of identification. The recordings are available and can be examined when assessing my personal conduct.
Our operation was also monitored throughout the 24-hour competition by an experienced and skilled on-site referee. To the best of my knowledge, he did not identify any wrongdoing by me during the competition. I was therefore surprised and saddened to learn from his recent message that he had apparently not been consulted before the final decision was reached.
I recognize that the circumstances described in the report are troubling. I understand why questions have been asked. I also understand why people may draw conclusions from the statistical evidence and from what occurred on the air.
But suspicion, association and a sanction against a team should not, by themselves, become proof of misconduct by an individual.
Unfortunately, since publication of the report, the reaction directed at me personally has gone far beyond criticism of the WRTC decision.
I have been subjected to an extraordinary amount of public condemnation on Facebook, YouTube, forums and other platforms. Accusations have extended beyond anything contained in the WRTC report and have included attacks on my character and integrity, as well as allegations entirely unrelated to WRTC, including accusations of racism.
What has been particularly disturbing is seeing people whom I have never met and who do not know me personally making statements about my character based on what they say they have heard from others. Second-hand stories, rumours and personal allegations have been repeated publicly and have gradually become mixed together with discussion of the actual findings of the Judging Committee.
The public discussion has also drawn in matters having nothing to do with WRTC-2026, including political disagreements and opinions expressed over the years.
I understand that some people may strongly disagree with opinions I have expressed. They are entitled to do so. I do not ask anyone to agree with me politically, nor do I intend to reopen political arguments here.
But disagreement with my political views is not evidence that I knowingly participated in misconduct at WRTC-2026. Neither are second-hand stories about my character, accusations made by people who have never knew me or even met me in person, or allegations repeated on social media.
Repetition does not turn an allegation into a fact.
I understand the anger and disappointment surrounding what happened at WRTC. I do not object to legitimate criticism, and I do not ask to be shielded from difficult questions about my own conduct. I am prepared to answer those questions openly and directly.
But there must be a distinction between evidence, inference, personal opinion, hearsay and accusation.
I cannot control what is written about me on Facebook, YouTube, forums or elsewhere. Nor do I intend to engage in personal arguments with every person who attacks me.
What I can do is ask those who know me — and particularly those entrusted with making decisions concerning my continued membership in organizations that have meant a great deal to me for many years — to distinguish carefully between what the WRTC Judging Committee actually found, what has subsequently been alleged about me by others, and what can actually be established about my own conduct.
For more than 50 years, amateur radio and contesting have been an important part of my life. I have had the privilege of participating in WRTC nine times. My reputation within this community was built over decades, through my actions, my relationships with fellow amateurs, and my record in this sport. It has been extremely painful to watch my reputation judged not only on the basis of a team disqualification, but also through unrelated allegations, political disagreements and stories repeated by people who have never met me.
I respectfully ask that this record, together with my individual conduct in this matter, be considered before conclusions are reached about my character or integrity.
Some people have suggested that I should issue a personal apology in the hope that doing so might reduce “the severity of the punishment.”
Let me be very clear about this.
I am deeply sorry that this happened at WRTC.
I am sorry for the damage it has caused to the competition, to our fellow competitors, to the amateur radio community, and to everyone associated with Team MB2M. I deeply regret that my callsign and reputation have become associated with this controversy.
But expressing sincere regret for what happened is fundamentally different from admitting personal responsibility for conduct that I maintain I neither committed, authorized nor knew about.
I cannot honestly apologize for personally committing an act that I maintain I did not commit.
Such an apology might make my situation easier in the short term. It might satisfy some of those calling for punishment. But it would not be truthful.
I do not believe that making a false admission is an appropriate way to demonstrate integrity.
I am not asking anyone to disregard the WRTC findings. I am not asking for the MB2M disqualification to be reversed. And I am not asking to be protected from criticism.
I am asking for something much narrower and, I believe, entirely reasonable:
Any judgment concerning me as an individual should be based upon evidence concerning my individual conduct.
The WRTC report itself recognizes that different members of a team may bear different responsibility and expressly states that the disqualifications apply to teams, not to individual team members. In its discussion of MB2M and MB2A, the report also records that no operator of those teams admitted an arrangement and that one operator stated that he had been unaware of any pre-existing arrangement while accepting the team’s disqualification if a violation were found.
I therefore ask that the same distinction be respected when judging me personally.
Public condemnation, no matter how widespread or strongly expressed, is not evidence of individual wrongdoing.
I have devoted decades of my life to amateur radio, contesting, and the friendships and relationships that have come with them. I hope that the reputation I built over those years will not be erased by assumptions about what I must have known or done simply because I was a member of a team that was disqualified.
I am not asking to be judged by sympathy. I am asking to be judged by evidence. On the facts. On my own actions. And on my own record.
Thank you for taking the time to read this rather long statement.
Yuri, VE3DZ