You are cooking right along in a RTTY contest, working station after
station, but your rate isn't so hot?
How come you aren't working rates like you do on CW and SSB?
Maybe you're sending too many non-value characters that slow everyone down.
Too much overhead.
Here's an article I wrote for National Contest Journal. Give it a read.
> What’s the best way to make contacts in RTTY contests? It depends.
>
> Almost everything in contests depends. Contesting is a dynamic,
> situation-dependent activity. There’s no one-size-fits-all approach to
> making RTTY contacts. That’s what makes contests fun. The trick is to match
> each contact to the situation, to maximize score and fun, and to be
> friendly so everyone comes back for more.
>
> Since everything depends, what's the best approach? I suggest modularity.
> Create modular macros that can be sent one at a time or strung together as
> the situation dictates. With modularity, you have the best of many
> worlds—crafting each contact to the conditions.
>
> Some ground rules. It’s a contest and a prime objective is to maximize
> score. It’s a contest and a prime objective is to have fun. It’s a contest
> and a prime objective is to help others have fun and maximize their scores.
> We’re all in this together, and we can all do a lot to help each other
> maximize score and have fun.
>
> The Amateur is Friendly.1 What’s the best way to be friendly? It depends.
> My rule for contests is that completing the contact in shipshape fashion as
> quickly as possible is the most friendly thing I can do for the other guy
> and for the other guys waiting. And, it’s generally the most friendly thing
> you can do for me. The running station sets the tone. If the CQing station,
> even if he’s my best friend, sends me a standard-issue exchange, the most
> friendly thing is to send him a standard-issue exchange without
> pleasantries. If he says HI HANK, then he’s giving me the go-ahead to
> loosen up a (little) bit. It’s a contest—be contest friendly during the
> event and regular friendly afterwards.
>
> To DE or not to DE. It depends, but mostly not. Almost all the time, who
> is sending is clear from sequence and timing. DE usually adds nothing to a
> contest exchange, and DE can be very confusing. For instance, W6SX 599 IN
> DE w4xxx. Ditch the DE.
>
> What’s the best way to CQ? It depends. A good approach is to maximize your
> call and minimize stuff that doesn’t add value. CQ DL DX RTTY CONTEST DE
> w8xxx—not so good. CQ DL W6SX W6SX CQ—much better. Or CQ TEST W6SX W6SX
> W6SX CQ. Note that the CQ at the end is standard RTTY contest procedure and
> helps late tuners know that you are soliciting contacts.
>
> How much to send the other guy’s call? It depends. When you’re answering
> a CQ, you don’t need to send the CQer’s call—he knows his call. Just drop
> your call once, twice, or three times depending on circumstances. How about
> when you’re running?
>
> CQ TEST W6SX W6SX CQ
> W0YK W0YK
> W0YK 599 23 23 (W0YK)
>
> Many routinely send the W0YK at the end of the exchange. Others never do.
> I suggest that it depends. If W0YK is the only station responding, there
> isn’t much to be gained by sending his call twice. If there is more than
> one caller, then sometimes, sending W0YK at the end of the exchange will
> avoid confusion and a time-wasting double. Note the sometimes. For
> instance, sometimes it pays to hesitate a bit and let multiple callers
> finish before responding to the first guy. In this case, I generally won't
> send the other guy's call at the end, but if I hear a signal just as I hit
> transmit, I'll add the other guy's call at the end. Even with multiple
> callers, often it’s still clear to everyone who is being working, and the
> second W0YK is not necessary. If you don’t lock yourself into always
> sending the second W0YK, you quickly develop a good sense of when to send
> it and when to skip it.
>
> What if you’ve answered a CQ. It depends. You are sending your report to
> someone who certainly knows his own call. Unless there’s ambiguity, I
> normally don’t send the CQer’s call. But many stations routinely do, and
> that’s OK. For the S&P station, I don’t think there is anything to be
> gained by sending the CQer’s call at the end of the exchange.
>
> (W6SX) 599 23 23
> (W0YK) TU W6SX CQ
>
> Many routinely send W0YK when confirming and concluding a QSO. Others
> never do. I suggest that it depends. If there is no doubt who was worked, I
> usually don’t send his call. But if there is any ambiguity, I’ll send it.
> Other times, for example, when trying to get a JA run going, I may send the
> other guy’s call to extend my transmit time and let other JAs know that I’m
> hearing them. Sometimes I’ll send the other guy’s call when I’m trying to
> defend a run frequency. It depends—there is no one answer.
>
> Sending the other guy’s call at the end of an exchange and sending the
> other guy’s call when acknowledging a contact is like a political or
> religious discussion. Some people always do it one way, others always the
> other way. I suggest that the best bet is flexibility suited to the
> circumstances, but I’m not going to argue with anyone who gets the contact
> done.
>
> What’s the best way to send repeats. I have one unequivocal answer. Send
> only what is being asked for. Don’t send his call—he knows his call. If he
> asks for the number, send only the number once, twice or three times. Do
> not send 599 33 33, and for sure don’t send 599 599 33!
>
> Which brings us to … macros and flexible macros. Be careful when using
> canned macros with your logging software. If the exchange is RST NR, then
> programming an F-key to send your exchange twice will yield 599 47 599 47.
> Never, never repeat 599. Send it once per contact and never send it again.
> It’s often best to hard program your F-keys instead of using your logging
> software macros. For instance, make F2 599 # # instead of EXCH EXCH. In
> many cases, you are smarter than your logging software.
>
> Flexible macros. If someone asks for your serial number again, don’t use
> F2, which will send your whole exchange. Instead program another F-key with
> your number only. The name of the game is to program F-keys so you can send
> exactly what the situation requires instead of being forced to send canned,
> extraneous stuff that wastes everybody’s time.
>
> What to send in your exchange? It depends. NCJ NAQP first.
>
> AA5AU HANK CA (AA5AU)
>
> Since I am a W6, live in California, have a decent signal, and am
> reasonably well known, I send HANK and CA once each. If my name were
> Maximilian, I’d send it twice. If I were a Six outside of California, I
> would definitely send my state twice. If your call makes where you live
> unambiguous, send your location only once. For instance, a VE3 needs to
> send ON only once.
>
> Now a contest with serial numbers, for instance, CQ WPX RTTY.
>
> K4GMH 599 328 328 (K4GMH)
>
> Some people say send serial number once. Others say twice. Still others
> say three times because if you get it two out of three times, you’ll know
> it’s right. I normally send serial number twice, and below I show how this
> works well. But the real answer is it depends. If you are loud and running,
> people get more than one chance to figure out your serial number, and once
> may be good enough. Caution—this may not work if the running station is
> SO2R where serial numbers might not be consecutive. If conditions are
> particularly poor, three times might be called for. It depends, which is
> why having flexible macros is a plus.
>
> Which brings us to the question of when to ask for a repeat. When do you
> have enough to log a contact? It depends. You don’t have to copy a number
> twice to be confident that you have it right.
>
> If I print 599 005 W6SX, the 599 and W6SX bracketing the 005 tell me it’s
> probably good. I’ll log it unless something else tells me to question it.
>
> One “something” is that you can often tell by ear if an exchange printed
> correctly. Or, perhaps more importantly, you can often tell by ear if an
> exchange is corrupted.
>
> If I print 599 005 0%&*, I’ll probably log 005.
>
> If I print 599 005^*A, I’ll ask for a repeat.
>
> There are lots of scenarios you can build. Contest radiosport is risk
> evaluation. Do I interrupt a 100-per-hour run to be 100% sure of an
> exchange? Or do I evaluate as above and take a chance I’ll lose a low-point
> QSO to log checking? Does my calculus change if it’s a new multiplier I’m
> not likely to find later? Of course.
>
> For a really good discussion of contest risk taking, see “Logging
> Accuracy: Error Control for SS,” by ND2T.2 In a contest, adjudicated score
> is the final arbitrator. I take some risks. My Log Checking Reports
> indicate that I’ve achieved a decent balance between 100% correct and score
> and fun.
>
> Finally, how do I know that the other guy has my call correct? It depends.
> For instance, if I’m running and I print W6RX 599 003 003, I probably won’t
> try to “correct” him. I send my call twice when I CQ and at least once
> every contact, so the other guy has had ample opportunity to get my call
> right. I assume that he sent my call correctly and it took a hit.
> Additionally, by sending 599 003 003 or TU 599 003 with or without my call,
> he is QSLing my call and exchange—he’s saying I have it, I have all I need.
> If he’s not sure of my call, he needs to ask for it. Contesting is a
> two-way street, and both operators have responsibility to get it right.
> But, it depends. If I print W6RX 599 003 003 W6RX, I’ll correct the other
> station.
>
> Modularity, no unneeded stuff, flexibility, and friendliness are what make
> contesting fun for everyone. See you in the next contest everyone.
>
>
> 1. The Amateur’s Code, Paul M. Segle, W9EEA (SK)
>
> 2. Available on the Northern California Contest Club website at
> http://www.nccc.cc/misc/ErrorControl-ND2T.wmv
>
Wanna work more stations? Wanna have more fun?
Get rid of no-real-information-conveyed stuff. Get rid of dots. Get rid of
dashes. Get rid of extra spaces. Get rid of DEs. Don't sent the other guy's
call when answering a CQ--he knows his call. ... Your rate will improve and
you and everyone else will have more fun.
Diddle Exuberantly,
Hank, W6SX
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|