[CQ-Contest] The intricacies of CW contesting habits.

[Gerry Hull]

Interesting comments, Ernie.  Nice to hear your perspective.

As an avid CW operator, i'd agree with you that someone sending crappy code
at ANY speed, and then not responding to your response at +5 wpm of their
speed,  is probably a LID.

However, in more than 35 years of CW contesting, I can say that most QRQ
contest operators are the exact opposite --
they send accurate, snappy exchanges, and can usually respond at any
speed.  If they are QRQ and you send very QRS, one of two things happen --
they copy your  QRQ and respond at any speed, or they ask for QRS.  In
almost every case, the station will choose to copy the QRQ call a few times
to get it.

Many CW contesters use the logging computer to generate CW, because
computers (hopefully) make less mistakes than us humans.

It's not clear in your message  -- are you using a computer to COPY the
code?  If you are, their is a technique that many ops use -- and is popular
in Eastern Europe, and other places.  It's the technique of sending the
"boring" part of an exchange  -- 5NN for example,  at very high speed --
say 20% above the normal speed, then the unique part at whatever speed they
are sending at.

THAT can certainly mess up even the best code reader.

I'm not s fan of that technique.  If I choose to go fast, I'll do it at a
pretty consistent speed.

I like QRQ in contests -- in fact, I'm rarely going below 35... unless
someone asks for QRS or I'm answering a slower station.  It seems to work
for me.  If you are calling CQ at 25, and someone comes back to you at a
very fast speed, they are not going to have much success.

If someone is sending terrible code during a contest, I'd choose to avoid
them unless they are a multiplier I need.

Here's hoping we see you in more CW contests!

I agree completely on cut numbers.

73, Gerry W1VE
Hancock, NH






On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 7:42 PM, Ernie Walls <vk3fm at wallsy.com.au> wrote:
>
> Now...I am not a contester; I play in them to pick up whatever
> band/mode/state/etc fills I can find, and generally have fun. And a VK3
> point is mostly appreciated because there are not that many of us around.
>
> I am also not a CW aficionado. I cannot read speed above about 8-10 WPM
> and have absolutely no interest in acquiring that skill. I also send code
> by machine, 'cause it's way easier, and much better, than doing it myself.
>
> Yes folks, I am what is known as a CW cretin, barely tolerable on the
> bands beside those venerable skilled CW fogies of 80 years ago. And my wife
> often calls me worse than that!
>
> But I play in/with the CW mode, because modern software allows me to do
> so. Which includes dabbling in contests. And, what I seem to be doing in
> every contest I do play in, which includes a cameo appearance in many
> smaller, regionalised contests is come upon someone who will insist in
> operating at 35+ WPM, and in doing so manages to send generally disgusting
> code (so my software tells me!) and cause much QRM asking for NR repeats
> and the like.
>
> I love ( I mean, I really LOVE) going back at these types at about five
> WPM faster than they are operating at, then sit back and watch what
> happens! Very regularly they vacate the frequency and can be found, doing
> the very same thing, a few kHz away. But I win the day because I have taken
> them out of their self-regulated, controlling, CW comfort zone. About once
> every 500 contest QSOs, I meet one of these people. Almost invariably from
> what was known as eastern Europe - although not always!
>
> Do I feel guilty - nope, it is part of the 'fun' I mentioned earlier.
>
> As for 'cut' numbers - never realised they created in so many folks so
> much angst - I PROMISE I will never use them again. Promise. Except for the
> ubiquitous 5NN of course - then again, that's different, if I read the
> posts right!
>
> Ernie Walls VK3FM
> Vk3fm at wallsy.com.au<mailto:Vk3fm at wallsy.com.au>
> Mobile 0418 301 483
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>