[CQ-Contest] Use of CW decoders in contests - a contrarian opinion

David Levine david at levinecentral.com
Sun May 30 03:47:24 PDT 2010


If I compare the use of the CW decoder with a RTTY contest, we are using the
same exact software to make the same exact contacts, just with a different
mode. I guess the only difference in a RTTY contest is everyone is using a
decoder unless someone can copy RTTY in their heads.

We don't enter RTTY contests as assisted just for using a program to decode
to transmission. But like you, I have so far entered all CW contests as
Single Op Low Power Assisted.

K2DSL - David

On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 12:23 AM, Steve Hanlon <asciibaron at verizon.net>wrote:

> On 5/29/2010 17:20, Ed Muns wrote:
> > Again, the key issue is about the operator skill to tune around and find
> > stations to work in the Single-Op Unassisted category.  That's why CW
> > decoders of a single frequency that the operator has tuned, is OK.  By
> > comparison, it is not OK to use spotting capability or Skimmers that
> decode
> > all frequencies on the band to effectively do the tuning for the
> operator.
> >
> >
> as a contester who relies on the CW decoder for my score, i feel it is
> assisting me in a more meaningful way than the CAT or computer generated
> code.  i know how to tune the VFO, i know how to send CW, what i can't
> do is copy contest CW.  without the decoder i could not make a contact.
> without the decoder my station stays off the air.
> that is a critical difference and why i enter as assisted in CW contests
> - the decoder is helping me do something i simply am not capable of
> doing right now.  i want to get to the point the decoder is no longer
> required for me to work CW contests.
> -Steve, WM3O

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list