Hi Tom,
I admire ur practices. I agree with all except perhaps your run rate
starting rate seems a bit fast, but as u say, u reduce it if the calls
decrease and u do respond to a request to QRS. I applaud ur contesting
methods.
Further, I hope there are others who are not afraid to join u on the
soapbox! We really do need "fishing" methods for CW contesting newbies,
and u had some very intriguing methods in ur post.
Happy New Year To All and Vy 73 de Frank W8HO
PS I agree completely, if someone is sending at 35-45 wpm, they better be
able to receive at that speed. Though I would advise slower sending would
improve their final score dramatically!
At 10:30 AM 12/31/2001 -0600, you wrote:
>Frank, W8HO, wrote:
>>My questions are: What do u consider appropriate rates for CW sending? Are
>>there different standards for rag chewing and contesting? Are you sure
>>that ur contesting rate is appropriate to get the most bang for ur run-time
>>frequency? Do u listen to those who ask for u to QRS, or simply ignore
>>them and continue at ur usual run rate if their request is not sent at very
>>close to ur usual send rate, waiting for the faster QSO?
>
>Since I'm just a Popgun when compared to the Big Guns, I'm sure I'm doing
>it all wrong, but...
>
>I tend to adjust my sending speed to the size of the calling pileup, or to
>the station I'm calling when in S&P.
>
>If I'm running, and it appears that I have a decent bunch of callers who
>have no problem copying 30+ WPM, I'll run 32/35+ WPM until things start to
>slow down. HOWEVER, REGARDLESS of what CW speed _I_ am running them at, if
>a station calls me at a speed quite a bit less than my current speed, I
>ALWAYS try to QRS down to his speed. If I fail to do that, it's MY FAULT,
>not his for not being able to send at 'my' speed.
>
>When I'm doing S&P, I always try to match the speed of the station I'm
>calling. My assumption is that, if he's calling at 40 WPM, then he can
>COPY 40 WPM as well. If he can't copy 40 WPM, then he should NOT be
>calling at that speed.
>
>When I'm CQing, and Q's are scarce, as they certainly can sometimes be
>from the Midwest, I'll QRS to 26-29 WPM (or less), and I'll QRS even more
>if I get responses at a slower speed.
>
>Yes, I know, it's not the most 'productive' way to operate, and I'll never
>be one of the Big Boys, but that's OK with me... I still remember when I
>was first learning to operate QRQ, especially in contests... there were
>times where I'd have to sit on a guy's frequency, copying each tiny piece
>of this exchange, one word at a transmission, until I got it all, before
>I'd call him. But, it taught me to copy better/faster, and that we the
>benefit of it all. Back then, I really DID appreciate those who were
>courteous enough to QRS for me... it enhanced my enjoyment of the contest,
>and I seriously doubt that the other op's rate suffered (significantly)
>from his efforts on my behalf.
>
>I agree that there's a treasure trove of newbies out there, many of whom
>WILL be ripe for the contest picking, and that we all SHOULD be more aware
>of their presence when we are operating... these are going to be OUR
>SUCCESSORS someday... we need to be cultivating them NOW.
>
>Stepping down from my soapbox now.
>
>Happy New Year folks!
>
>73 - Tom Hammond N0SS
>
>
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|