[CQ-Contest] Cut numbers

[Jukka Klemola]

...
>Morse coded numbers have regular 5 elements structure but we don't need
all >of them, just the exact point of dot to dash transition.  If I am
expecting >numbers, A is enough for 1, U for 2, V for 3, E for 5, G for
7, N for 9 and >T equals 0.  Numbers 4, 6 and 8 can't be reasonably
abbreviated.  

I do not know what code that is.
This kind of acronyms would be impossible to handle in a contest.
# is already difficult enough.
# is overly difficult to some of us. And the # of the 'some' is growing
as we are growing .. in age.

Really - come on Mario.
I hope you are just kidding above.


>Fortunately only NEAT usage makes sense for significantly reduced
timing.  >We are supposed to be smart decoders, not automated ones.
However, machine >sending is prefered as it reduces human transmission
errors!

NET is my two euro cents.
Blurring 1 by sending A is unnecessarily difficult.
It only provides to mis-copies and is not worth it.

You are worth a better score.

Simply use 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8.
0 can be T but many stations do not get that in a # exchange.
Even more stations will be puzzled by N instead of 9.

After that shortening goes counterproductive.


In a CQWW exchange for others than VE/W and Russian stations, I do not
really need to listen what they send for zone.

But a serial number is a vital element of a QSO.
Make your serial number easy to copy at the first transmission.


Three repeats at 36WPM is much slower than one clear number at 20WPM.

Even at 10 WPM if someone sends me a letter U in the middle of something
I am expecting to get a series of numbers just makes me send ? and that
makes the QSO longer in secnds.


Clearer messages increase rate.
Rate is Fun.

Increase the Fun !


>73 de Mario, S56A, N1YU

73,
Jukka OH6LI