[CQ-Contest] Scary

Wed Nov 6 10:33:58 EST 2019

So, I will buck the consensus.

I've been doing SS about 42 years or so.   When I started I was a
snot-nosed teenager.   In my first SS, I had to listen to a station 5 to 10
times before I got all his information, and then I prayed I could copy his
QSO number.
(Not to mention KP4AST on SS SSB, who was such as fast talker it took the
same amount of times listening to even get his call!)

This is the story for many of those top-ten players in SS now back then.
 Learn by pushing yourself.    I believe slowing down the contest will not
encourage more CW activity.   The high end of the band has
always been a safe place for slower-speed guys in SS.

I would hazard to guess I send at one of the fastest CW speeds in SS.
 When the Pileups were enormous, I would send at 38-40 wpm.     When things
got slow, I would slow down to 34 or so,
Did I work many slow stations?   Perhaps 100s.   When stations called me
with a slow speed, I replied with a slow speed.  One op called me at 18
wpm.   I answered him at 18 WPM, and we made it.
(A new VE4 CW op who was under the tutelage of Cary, VE4EA, operating as
AJ1I).     It was NEVER a problem to QRS, when needed.   In some 960 QSOs,
I think I had one operator actually ask me to QRS, which I did
immediately.

With today's spotting technology and most new ops choosing to avail
themselves of spots, I'm sure they came to my frequency not being able to
copy at my sending speed.
Yet, we had a QSO.   It's simple to QRS as necessary.

However, IMHO, to keep peak rates I like to go fast.    It seems to work
for me in all contests.
I think it encourages new ops to strive for more.

I see this same interaction in CWOps CWT's and in the big four.

73

Gerry, W1VE
VY1AAA in SS CW 2019

On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 10:37 PM Stephen Bloom <sbloom at acsalaska.net> wrote:

>
> Agreed on all of this.  One thing is, the newer cw operators (and there
> are more than you realize, check out .040-.060 above band edge) are
> generated by CWops and SKCC.  If we want more CW contesters going forward,
> we need to be looking in that direction.  I support the ARRL in many ways,
> but in terms of developing and providing opportunities for new ops, beyond
> selling them books, they just aren't a factor.  In the specific case of SS,
> I've long thought we should designate, say .050 and above as "Slow Speed."
> There are ops out there who enjoy cw, but are scared to death of looking
> foolish in a contest.
>
> 73
> Steve KL7SB
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> Joe
> Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2019 5:56 AM
> To: John Geiger <af5cc2 at gmail.com>; AB2E Darrell <ab2e at hotmail.com>
> Cc: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Scary
>
> The Rookie Roundup is dismal! It is NOTHING like the Novice Roundup of
> like the 70's Participation levels are soo low, that a pretty good portion
> of the sections, you can make just one contact and take first place because
> no one enters in from there.
>
> When the ARRL thought about bringing this contest back, I wish they kept
> the same old format of like 9 or 10 days operating window, but still only
> use 124 to 30 hours of operating time.
>
> Just modernize it with the new modes that a newly licensed person can
> use.  IE: 3 Modes CW, SSB, Digital.
> And like Field Day you can work them on each band and each mode.
>
> Same with Mults each band and mode to encourage people to try different
> bands and modes.
>
> Joe WB9SBD
>
> That would have been a BLAST
> Sig
> The Original Rolling Ball Clock
> Idle Tyme
> Idle-Tyme.com
> http://www.idle-tyme.com
> On 11/4/2019 10:20 PM, John Geiger wrote:
> > How many rookie operators are showing up in the CW version of the
> > Rookie Roundup?  That might give us a good indication of what the
> > expect in the CW SS in years to come.
> >
> > 73 John W5TD
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 9:41 PM AB2E Darrell <ab2e at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Pete,
> >> Good point about the new ops showing up.
> >> It's been 3 or 4 years since I operated SS CW more than just a couple
> >> hours.
> >> I noticed quite a few CKs from 00-18. Also quite a number of ops
> >> coming back to my CQ at between 17-21 WPM.
> >> While I like to typically operate at 30+wpm in contests, I try to
> >> slow down for the slower ops that came back.
> >> I think it will help them hang in there. Sometimes I just slowed down
> >> some, like to 24 or 25 so as to still challenge them and hopefully
> >> help improve their speed.
> >>
> >> There seems to be some attrition in the diehard 24hour high-speed
> >> operators, but perhaps that;s my imagination.
> >> I'm thinking back to the 90s and 80s when on Sunday afternoon a lot
> >> of operators had 1000+ QSO counts, only worked a few of those on Sun
> >> this year, and one of those was Multi.
> >>
> >> 73 Darrell AB2E
> >>
> >> ________________________________
> >> From: CQ-Contest <cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com> on behalf of
> >> N4ZR < n4zr at comcast.net>
> >> Sent: Monday, November 4, 2019 5:44 PM
> >> To: cq-contest at contesting.com <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> >> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Scary
> >>
> >> The one I got from the N1MM site had over 10,000.  I was surprised by
> >> how many people weren't in it.  My theory, at least, is that there's
> >> a little new blood every year, and a good thing.  Too many checks in
> the 50s.
> >>
> >> 73, Pete N4ZR
> >> Check out the Reverse Beacon Network
> >> at <http://reversebeacon.net>, now
> >> spotting RTTY activity worldwide.
> >> For spots, please use your favorite
> >> "retail" DX cluster.
> >>
> >> On 11/4/2019 1:09 PM, Radio KØHB wrote:
> >>> I loaded a “call history” file into N1MM+ for this weekends SS CW.
> >>>
> >>> Out of over 500 contacts, just seven were NOT in that file.  Five of
> >> them had checks from the last century.
> >>> 73, de Hans, KØHB
> >>> "Just a boy and his radio"™
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> CQ-Contest mailing list
> >>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> >>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> CQ-Contest mailing list
> >> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> >> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >>
> >> [https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-green-avg-v
> >> 1.png
> >> ]<
> >>
> http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail
> >
> >>     Virus-free. www.avg.com<
> >> http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&u
> >> tm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> CQ-Contest mailing list
> >> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> >> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>