Check where the big guns set up at the start of a contest. 99% of them
choose an even freq. The rest of us get the spoils.
So, if you are doing S&P early on, set your tuning rate to 5 rather than 1
and save a lot of work. On most rigs, it's easy enough to set to 1 later on
if you want.
If you are running on an "off" frequency and many of the contacts seem off
frequency to you, there is no reason not to adjust your freq to at least a
.05 to make things easier for everyone.
Being .03 off in a big SSB contest can cost you a contact if you are low
power S&P. Why should the guy running with a big pileup adjust his rig to
hear you when he has 10 others clearly calling him on freq. Works for CW,
but is a hindrance using SSB. Result is that both of you might miss the Q.
If you think you can squeeze a 3.7 hHz signal on at .87, why not move to
.75 or .00? Are you really 3.7 away from everyone at .87?
Remember, if you are running, your objective is to make it easier for
anyone (including the newbies) to make contact with you. It's not about
your ego, upour history of 50 years of CW contesting or your aversion
to following the norm, it's about making better contacts.
I know that this doesn't make sense to some, but I had a lucrative career
observing......... and thinking about commonalities in what I observed.
But then, this is a sport, not a living. Play ball!
Contest exuberantly,
__________
Stan, K4SBZ
On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 12:22 PM Barry Jacobson <bdj@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> There is something to be said psychologically for round number freqs. Just
> like companies pay big money for phone numbers ending in 00 or 000. Makes
> you seem like a very big operation. Not saying should be standard practice,
> as others pointed out tune for minimum QRM to others and yourself. But if
> band has room, I probably find myself tuning to a round number.
>
> Best,
>
> Barry WA2VIU
>
> --
> Barry Jacobson
> WA2VIU
> bdj@alum.mit.edu
> @bdj_phd
>
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2023, 11:39 AM Stanley Zawrotny <k4sbz.stan@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I was severely criticized about these observations, so I expect a lot of
>> flack.
>>
>> Until recently, I mostly did search and pounce rather than running
>> because of my station. I observed over the years that the majority of the
>> stations seem to set up initially on even frequencies and on multiples of
>> .25. After I got my Flex-6600 and could SEE transmissions, I SAW that this
>> was true. This is not channelizing, it is just common practice, intentional
>> or not.
>>
>> So if you are doing S&P, you will save yourself a lot of effort by tuning
>> directly to those frequencies. If it sounds s off, the tune further by ear.
>>
>> I have observed that spotted frequencies of .9, really should be .00. I
>> have wasted time trying to make contact on the .9 freq and when I moved to
>> .00, I got right through.
>>
>> After the bands get crowded, people will set up anywhere they can
>> squeeze in, but many will use the .25 multiples.
>>
>> Ops who are mostly CW Contesters will vary more than others.
>>
>> These are just my observations, but give them a try before you throw the
>> stones.
>>
>> Stan, K4SBZ
>>
>> "Real radio bounces off the sky."
>>
>> > On Aug 16, 2023, at 11:30 AM, Barry Jacobson <bdj@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi, due to poor hearing, I am not on SSB that much, but mainly CW.
>> However,
>> > some improvements with my hearing device have made me more willing to
>> try
>> > SSB. I am wondering if people always use integral number of KHz. In CW,
>> I
>> > never paid attention to exact freq, just found empty freq in band and
>> > called CQ. But recently was calling CQ for a ragchew in SSB, and the
>> fellow
>> > said I am on a fractional freq and wanted to know exactly what it was
>> so he
>> > could tune it better. Said was unusual. Is that always the practice in
>> SSB
>> > and in SSB contests to use whole numbers? I imagine the bands get
>> crowded
>> > and not always so easy to find a whole number freq. Please correct me if
>> > that is standard practice in CW and RTTY, as well, something I never
>> knew
>> > about.
>> >
>> > 73,
>> >
>> > Barry WA2VIU
>> >
>> > --
>> > Barry Jacobson
>> > WA2VIU
>> > bdj@alum.mit.edu
>> > @bdj_phd
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > CQ-Contest mailing list
>> > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|