[CQ-Contest] Check of 00, a disadvantage?

[k0luz at topsusa.com]

My only problem with the 00, 01, 02, etc.  checks were that I would absent
mindedly treat the 0 as a leading zero and not type it in the log thus
causing the qso to not save because of an error in the check.

I guess that problem will go away as I use it more often although with the
number of stations with checks for 2000 or later being so few,  maybe I will
never become familiar with it!  hi

73 
Red K0LUZ (N4WW op)    

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com 
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of RICHARD BOYD
> Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 12:31 PM
> To: cq-contest
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Check of 00, a disadvantage?
> 
> On a SS check of 00, zero zero, being a disadvantage, I see 
> it kind of the opposite, as an advantage, because all those 
> dahs, what I call "dah heavy" is easier to understand that a 
> lot of dits or some combination of dits and dahs.  Remember 
> 5H5HH (the callsign)?
> 
> I have often thought my check, 65, could be more challenging 
> than other checks.  In fact, I have an idea...I think from 
> now on I'm going to program in a speed slowdown, for the 
> check.  Even though that, in itself, a speed change, could 
> throw some people off.
> 
> Personally, I think 00 may be about the best check there is, 
> no dits at all.  Easy to understand.  Making it clear the 
> first time, every time, probably saves time versus having to 
> give repeats.
> 
> By the way, is there any rules requirement that your check be 
> accurate?  Within the rules, can't you pick any check you 
> want?  On mine, for instance, honestly, I can't remember, 
> absolutely for sure, whether I got my license in 65 or in 66. 
>  66 would probably be a better check, in that it's a 
> repeating number.  I was always biased towards the earlier 
> number because, especially back then, it seemed cooler to 
> have been licensed longer.  It's been so long ago now that 
> doesn't much matter to me any more.  No, I've got it clear in 
> my mind now, now that I ponder it.  It was definitely 65, but 
> the question was whether I got my license when I was 12 or 
> 13, and that may depend on whether we're talking about when I 
> took it or when I received it in the mail, since back then it 
> could take a while.
> 
> 73 - Rich KE3Q (WP3R op)
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>