I typed 130-150 WPM with 160-170 WPM bursts on QWERTY, the layout I grew up typing for most of my life. I switched from QWERTY to Dvorak over the course of 8~

I typed 130-150 WPM with 160-170 WPM bursts on QWERTY, the layout I grew up typing for most of my life. I switched from QWERTY to Dvorak over the course of 8~ months and attained 120~ WPM with no discernible difference in comfort. I then switched from Dvorak to Colemak over the course of 3~ months. I was back to 130-150 WPM but lacked any ability to "burst" at faster speeds for short periods of time. I felt slightly more comfort typing in Colemak than I did QWERTY/Dvorak but it interrupted workflow too much and I ended up switching back to QWERTY. After my experiences, I firmly believe any significant benefits people get from switching keyboard layouts isn't from switching keyboard layouts, but rather, from learning how to type properly. This goes for comfort, speed, and accuracy. I know of very, very few people who I would define as "excellent" typists (>120WPM) claiming any benefit from switching layouts. Switching back and forth for Colemak/QWERTY is easy for me, I struggle with Dvorak as I am out of practice ("use it or lose it"). Learn to Stenotype if you truly want speed [0]. If you switch keyboard layouts it should only be because you never really "learned how to type" or if you feel slight comfort gains are worth breaking existing workflows over. On Mobile I use a QWERTY layout for English and flick input for Japanese. E: Also I believe there are studies that "micro-movements" are more harmful in the long term, causing more RSI. So Colemak's smaller, more comfortable movements may have been long-term harmful. I can't find these studies but I faintly remember reading about this. If anyone has any proof one way or the other I'd love to see it. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stenotype https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stenotype