Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+CW\s+Accuracy\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+CW\s+Accuracy\s*$/: 15 ]

Total 15 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] CW Accuracy (score: 1): Author: "W4ZW" <w4zw@comcast.net>; Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 10:24:52 -0400; After reviewing a few of my past log UBN reports, I decided to find out where I was busting calls. So I started working out with RUFZ-XP and made several interesting discoveries. The first culprit is; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-09/msg00155.html (9,138 bytes)
2. Re: [CQ-Contest] CW Accuracy (score: 1): Author: KI9A@aol.com; Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 19:26:34 EDT; Anyone else notice this aging by-product? Not yet...but, I did the same thing with RUFZ, and found it was my non-existent typing skills. Seeing my UBN's were almost the same in both CW & SSB, I decid; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-09/msg00159.html (6,963 bytes)
3. Re: [CQ-Contest] CW Accuracy (score: 1): Author: Barry <w2up@mindspring.com>; Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 01:35:56 +0000; There's no question age is a factor. I've been doing some RUFZ practicing lately and I find progress VERY slow. As a matter of fact, I think I've only improved back to the level I was at when I was a; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-09/msg00160.html (9,339 bytes)
4. Re: [CQ-Contest] CW Accuracy (score: 1): Author: "Rex Maner" <k7qq@netzero.net>; Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 03:43:35 -0000; I am starting to Age a bit also and the copy seems ok but the typing is sure leaving some to be desired, I recomment Morserunner also as something to increase copy speed and typing improvemnet. Quack; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-09/msg00166.html (12,158 bytes)
5. Re: [CQ-Contest] CW Accuracy (score: 1): Author: "K5ZM" <k5zm@comcast.net>; Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 22:01:10 -0700; Not to mention having to put up with lids! Yes. There's actually a "lid factor" incorporated into MR. Actually, it seems to increase right along with one's progress. Most frustrating :) But I do tend; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-09/msg00168.html (12,295 bytes)
6. Re: [CQ-Contest] CW Accuracy (score: 1): Author: "Dallas and Lucy" <ludal@dmv.com>; Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 07:11:50 -0400; Oh yea, and another one I can add to the list is letter reversals. I call it "digital dyslexia"! I even do it in my emials. :) Dallas W3PP _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest m; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-09/msg00170.html (10,310 bytes)
7. Re: [CQ-Contest] CW Accuracy (score: 1): Author: Barry <w2up@mindspring.com>; Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 11:14:27 +0000; Ian, When I practice with Morserunner, I set it for 10 minute runs with an activity of 4, using the HST mode. With 2 teenage kids, there's just too much commotion around here to be sure I'll have an; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-09/msg00171.html (13,914 bytes)
8. Re: [CQ-Contest] CW Accuracy (score: 1): Author: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@mts.net>; Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 07:55:53 -0500; Like Barry said, Morse Runner is the only program you need to know. It trains you on the full gamut of CW skills: pileups, lids, QRN, QRM, QSB, RIT, high-speed, low-speed -- and of course, typing! I; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-09/msg00173.html (9,277 bytes)
9. Re: [CQ-Contest] CW Accuracy (score: 1): Author: "N7MAL" <N7MAL@CITLINK.NET>; Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 22:22:26 -0000; Barry I would like to respectfully suggest you save your response and re-visit it in 15 years. The problem W4ZV is talking about is 'Father-Time'. Unfortunately, in the long run, Father-Time is going; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-09/msg00175.html (12,728 bytes)
10. Re: [CQ-Contest] CW Accuracy (score: 1): Author: Zack Widup <w9sz@prairienet.org>; Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 23:59:10 -0500 (CDT); I did that a couple times this weekend in the VHF contest. I wrote down the call, thought "That isn't right" and listened to him send it again. Then I corrected it. "Dyslexics of the World Untie!" 73; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-09/msg00185.html (7,520 bytes)
11. Re: [CQ-Contest] CW Accuracy (score: 1): Author: "Craig Cook" <craig.n7or@gmail.com>; Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 12:35:34 -0700; Something funny is going on. I honestly used to think that I was slightly above average. In other words, if there were 1500 entrants in a CW SS, my cw skills would be among the top 750. I always thou; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-09/msg00217.html (11,409 bytes)
12. Re: [CQ-Contest] CW Accuracy (score: 1): Author: "Clive Whelan" <clive.whelan@btinternet.com>; Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 23:58:05 -0000; I suspect, that for most of the respondents, the problems are two fold; certainly that is the case for myself. 1. Lack of keyboard skills and/or 2. Poor memory retention/ translation. re 1. For those; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-09/msg00221.html (14,595 bytes)
13. Re: [CQ-Contest] CW Accuracy (score: 1): Author: 4X4KF <4x4kf@iarc.org>; Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 07:35:36 +0300; Welcome to the club of aging. The alternative is worse. Michael 4X4KF -- _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-09/msg00226.html (8,501 bytes)
14. Re: [CQ-Contest] CW Accuracy (score: 1): Author: 4X4KF <4x4kf@iarc.org>; Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 07:47:51 +0300; The problem is that we old farts learned instant recognition to pencil/paper and not to keyboards. Old habits are difficult to get rid of. Add to that the decreasing memory quality and it shows in th; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-09/msg00227.html (18,951 bytes)
15. Re: [CQ-Contest] CW Accuracy (score: 1): Author: Bill Coleman <aa4lr@arrl.net>; Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2006 12:03:17 -0500; Sorry for responding to an old message. If your typing ability is the problem -- why not just learn how to type? It's a skill, like CW, and can be learned with practice. There are several software pr; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-12/msg00672.html (7,583 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 15
Page: [1]