Idly musing, I thought of this a few moments ago. It isn't a CW testing
question, but is related by being a CW operating question.


With the likely demise of Morse code testing, is there any reason to
have contests give double the points for Morse code contacts?

While of course all contest rules are inherently arbitrary, does it
make sense to have one mode of contact be "more equal" than others?

Put another way, if you think that CW contacts should be worth double
points, is it fair to have say, PSK31 contacts worth the same double
points such as in Field day? Our GOTA station racked up a fair number of
points operating PSK31, and it was certainly no more difficult than
operating Phone.

I've seen a number of cases where a phone operator has worked hard and
logged a lot of QSO's, only to be beaten by a CW op with little more
than half that number.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Subject: Morse and Contests
From: Mike Coslo
Date: 4/27/2004 7:34 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Idly musing, I thought of this a few moments ago. It isn't a CW testing

question, but is related by being a CW operating question.

With the likely demise of Morse code testing, is there any reason to
have contests give double the points for Morse code contacts?

Sure...why not? It requires some REAL skill to do. In this regard, as in
any other pursuit in life, greater skill should be rewarded.

While of course all contest rules are inherently arbitrary, does it
make sense to have one mode of contact be "more equal" than others?

Not "more equal"...Just better compensation.

As a Nurse with my experience, credentials and skills, I expect to be
compensated accordiningly. So why not be "compensated" in a contest that
required using honed skills, too...?!?!

Put another way, if you think that CW contacts should be worth double
points, is it fair to have say, PSK31 contacts worth the same double
points such as in Field day? Our GOTA station racked up a fair number of
points operating PSK31, and it was certainly no more difficult than
operating Phone.

And how long would it take a "new" Ham to master using a keyboard?

I've seen a number of cases where a phone operator has worked hard and
logged a lot of QSO's, only to be beaten by a CW op with little more
than half that number.

Shudda been on the paddles!

Seriously, though...Most contests differentiatemodes in awards...

Steve, K4YZ

Steve Robeson K4CAP wrote:
Subject: Morse and Contests
From: Mike Coslo
Date: 4/27/2004 7:34 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Idly musing, I thought of this a few moments ago. It isn't a CW testing


question, but is related by being a CW operating question.

With the likely demise of Morse code testing, is there any reason to
have contests give double the points for Morse code contacts?


Sure...why not? It requires some REAL skill to do. In this regard, as in
any other pursuit in life, greater skill should be rewarded.


True it does take some skill. But if we use Field day as an example,
there is so much else going on that I find it hard to make special
compensations for certain modes.

I would make an exception for "demonstration modes" such as the lesser
used modes such as sat ops, feld-hell, etc. I'd use these as multipliers
though.


While of course all contest rules are inherently arbitrary, does it
make sense to have one mode of contact be "more equal" than others?


Not "more equal"...Just better compensation.

As a Nurse with my experience, credentials and skills, I expect to be
compensated accordiningly. So why not be "compensated" in a contest that
required using honed skills, too...?!?!


Put another way, if you think that CW contacts should be worth double
points, is it fair to have say, PSK31 contacts worth the same double
points such as in Field day? Our GOTA station racked up a fair number of
points operating PSK31, and it was certainly no more difficult than
operating Phone.


And how long would it take a "new" Ham to master using a keyboard?


We had a kid come on and operate psk31 almost immediately. It was
amazing. I had picked it up quickly, but I did some reading beforehand.
This young fellow was operating like a pro in no time. In fact, I'm
modifying the setup for next year to allow more of the PSK frequencies
for the GOTA. The kid was transfixed, and sat patiently working 14.070
until he had worked the band clean.


I've seen a number of cases where a phone operator has worked hard and
logged a lot of QSO's, only to be beaten by a CW op with little more
than half that number.


Shudda been on the paddles!

hehe

Seriously, though...Most contests differentiatemodes in awards...


Just seems like the ones I participate in give double for the CW. I'll
need to look some more.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Subject: Morse and Contests
From: Mike Coslo
Date: 4/27/2004 1:22 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Steve Robeson K4CAP wrote:

And how long would it take a "new" Ham to master using a keyboard?

We had a kid come on and operate psk31 almost immediately...(SNIP)

That's my point! Almsot anyone can do it. So why give it par-level
scoring with Morse Code?

Just seems like the ones I participate in give double for the CW. I'll
need to look some more.

I am contemplating a trip to VO1 for Sweepstakes this year. I had hoped
to go last year but a family emergency canx'd that idea. Not sure if I will go
for CW or SSB weekend, tho...Can't swing both!

73

Steve, K4YZ

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

"Mike" == Mike Coslo writes:

Mike With the likely demise of Morse code testing, is there any
Mike reason to have contests give double the points for Morse code
Mike contacts?

How is the presence or absence of Morse code testing related to the
point multiplier for Morse code contacts? They're orthogonal, as far
as I can tell.

Mike While of course all contest rules are inherently arbitrary, does
Mike it make sense to have one mode of contact be "more equal" than
Mike others?

Yes, in my humble opinion. It's harder (at least for me and many of
my ham friends) to make contacts via CW, so those should be worth more
points.

Mike Put another way, if you think that CW contacts should be worth
Mike double points, is it fair to have say, PSK31 contacts worth the
Mike same double points such as in Field day? Our GOTA station racked
Mike up a fair number of points operating PSK31, and it was certainly
Mike no more difficult than operating Phone.

I don't operate PSK31, and I'm not that interested in trying at the
moment, so I can't say.

Mike I've seen a number of cases where a phone operator has worked
Mike hard and logged a lot of QSO's, only to be beaten by a CW op
Mike with little more than half that number.

And how hard did that CW op work?

Mike - Mike KB3EIA -

Jack.
- --
Jack Twilley
jmt at twilley dot org
http colon slash slash www dot twilley dot org slash tilde jmt slash
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFAjrUeGPFSfAB/ezgRAhxOAKCfflw5xPgEzJIa7PPN9vpLi7/83wCfSi5S
3EeSAY8uleph+tUYvVWcFNk=
=sI7M
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Mike Coslo wrote:



Many if not most contests are mode specific. Like the "whatever CW
sprint" or
"North European SSB contest"..... Or RTTY events.

And how hard did that CW op work?



Well some of us here could do it while driving a bus. I wouldn't recomment
it, as if something happened that driver would be in deep do-do.....

"Robert Casey" wrote

Many if not most contests are mode specific. Like the
"whatever CW
sprint" or "North European SSB contest"..... Or RTTY events.

We allow 2 points for CW, 2 points for RTTY, and 1 point for
phone. See http://www.w0aa.org/mnqp/2004/mnqprule.html

73, de Hans, K0HB
--
SOC # 291 http://www.qsl.net/soc/
FISTS # 7419 http://www.fists.org
NCI # 4304 http://www.nocode.org/

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

"Robert" == Robert Casey writes:

Jack And how hard did that CW op work?

Robert Well some of us here could do it while driving a bus. I
Robert wouldn't recomment it, as if something happened that driver
Robert would be in deep do-do.....

True, just like some of those phone ops could do it while driving an
SUV filled with brats in soccer cleats. What's your point?

Jack.
- --
Jack Twilley
jmt at twilley dot org
http colon slash slash www dot twilley dot org slash tilde jmt slash
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFAjsPrGPFSfAB/ezgRAgybAJ92dlOK9JlVY5s9OEVuO14NtIPm4ACfbKOk
REl/krIR11Wnwuji8DPpLkg=
=skfO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Mike Coslo wrote in message ...
Idly musing, I thought of this a few moments ago. It isn't a CW testing
question, but is related by being a CW operating question.

With the likely demise of Morse code testing, is there any reason to
have contests give double the points for Morse code contacts?

Yep. In fact it should be triple for CW and double for data modes.

While of course all contest rules are inherently arbitrary, does it
make sense to have one mode of contact be "more equal" than others?

Sure - if that mode uses less spectrum space and is more efficient.

Put another way, if you think that CW contacts should be worth double
points, is it fair to have say, PSK31 contacts worth the same double
points such as in Field day? Our GOTA station racked up a fair number of
points operating PSK31, and it was certainly no more difficult than
operating Phone.

It's more than fair. If anything the slant is towards 'phone because
you can put almost anybody in front of the mike after a few minutes
instruction and they can make FD QSOs (particularly if there's a
'logger' sitting right there).

Working CW takes special skills, working PSK-31 takes more equipment
and some skill (not as much as CW, of course, but more than 'phone).
Both modes use much less spectrum space and are more efficient. So
their use should be encouraged on Field Day (which is about the only
large mixed-mode HF contest in existence).

I've seen a number of cases where a phone operator has worked hard and
logged a lot of QSO's, only to be beaten by a CW op with little more
than half that number.

Said CW op also worked hard, did he not? And is "hard work" the
criteria, or effectiveness? You can fit at least 10 CW or PSK QSOs in
the space of one SSB QSO. Shouldn't that sort of efficiency be
encouraged?

73 de Jim, N2EY