I’m also not a good cw op - I use a software decoder as backup and ask for
plenty of repeats. That’s why I don’t score high in CW contests as I do in
phone.
The ultra fast stations were hard to copy unless they were well known. Why?
73
Ria, N2RJ
On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:13 PM K9MA <k9ma@sdellington.us> wrote:
> My point, exactly!
>
> 73,
> Scott K9MA
>
> On 11/28/2017 21:33, Adam Mercier wrote:
> > Thank you, Scott. I’m not a CW contester (I prefer phone and RTTY
> contests) mostly because I have a 15 wpm ear, and my decoding software
> doesn’t do well on 30+ wpm. I decided to give this contest a try because I
> was lured in by the idea of logging new DXCCs (I got one new one with PS0F)
> on CW. My rate was horrible because I had to listen to stations multiple
> passes to make sure I got their call and exchange right before I’d call
> them. There were so many that were loud, but blazing fast—so much so that
> I couldn’t make heads or tails of it, so I just spun the dial. That’s a
> missed Q for both of us. I wonder how many points were left on the table
> by those stations because us “casual contesters” just moved along? Perhaps
> it wasn’t a significant amount, but I believe that contests thrive when
> casual contesters and passers-by jump into the mix. Otherwise all the
> powerhouses would have all worked each other in the first 12 hours of the
> contest, and would then have nobody left to log....so, why not facilitate
> those Qs and QRS when you hear someone call you at 15 or 20 wpm? Just my
> neophyte thought....
> >
> > Adam, KM7N
> >
> >
> >
> >> On Nov 28, 2017, at 11:10, K9MA <k9ma@sdellington.us> wrote:
> >>
> >> I completely fail to understand why so many operators insist on calling
> CQ at 45 wpm, when no one is coming back. (There were lots of them last
> weekend, especially from zone 33.) This seem entirely counterproductive.
> Not only does it discourage operators who aren't comfortable at that speed,
> but it also makes the call impossible to copy under some conditions for
> even the best operators. Isn't a slow QSO better than no QSO?
> >>
> >> 73,
> >> Scott K9MA
> >>
> >>
> >>> On 11/28/2017 10:10, Ria Jairam wrote:
> >>> I received comments from some of my friends that they didn't want to
> >>> wade in because it would be like driving a unicycle on an interstate.
> >>> There were some doing 40-50WPM... not that there is anything wrong
> >>> with speed, but sometimes who want to casually participate and "give
> >>> out points" get scared away.
> >>>
> >>> I did a steady 30WPM and QRS as necessary.
> >>>
> >>> Something to keep in mind.
> >>>
> >>> That said I worked several straight keys, tons of bugs, and a good bit
> >>> of QLF. All in the fun.
> >>>
> >>> 73
> >>> Ria, N2RJ
> >>>
> >>>> On Sat, Nov 25, 2017 at 10:11 PM, Charles Harpole <hs0zcw@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>> You have slow CW? My solution:
> >>>>
> >>>> K3 set at 400 bandwidth. P3 panadapter and large monitor. Start at
> bottom
> >>>> of band and tune center of slim visual pip. K3, spots, and your head
> >>>> confirm callers' letters.
> >>>> Push programmed send..... send your call sign.
> >>>> Learned my own call at high speed, so I read mine.
> >>>> Read screen to confirm his info, even with cut numbers, including an
> E for
> >>>> 5 in 5NN, moan.
> >>>> Push button to send ur info.
> >>>> Log 'em.
> >>>> Tune 500cycles up and work next loud sig.
> >>>> A killer solution to slow copying speed. S&P produces about 1 to 2
> per
> >>>> minute, so dive in and enjoy 30+ wpm!
> >>>> 73,
> >>>> Charly, HS0ZCW
> >>>>
> >>>> <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon
> >
> >>>> Virus-free.
> >>>> www.avast.com
> >>>> <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link
> >
> >>>> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> CQ-Contest mailing list
> >>>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> >>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> CQ-Contest mailing list
> >>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> >>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >>
> >> --
> >> Scott K9MA
> >>
> >> k9ma@sdellington.us
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> CQ-Contest mailing list
> >> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> >> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
> --
>
> Scott K9MA
>
> k9ma@sdellington.us
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|