I think Warren's right, to a point.
We have all accepted that to grow contesting, we must allow people the
chance to grow. So we slow down when called by someone at 15 wpm instead of
our 28. We explain to someone what the heck a 'check' is.
So I think the odd hiccup we might hear when an op is trying to learn how to
SO2R we can chalk up to the spirit of growth that is ham radio.
I think if people want to opt out of SO into some separate SO1R category
like the tribander-wires category in some contests, fine. But SO is SO and
should remain the gold standard. And if the best ops are the ones who SO2R,
along with those who don't but don't want to marginalize their effort by
playing in some B-side semifinal, we should celebrate that.
Nobody ever talks about the SO1Rs who win. Against the SO2Rs.
Whenever the SO2R argument comes up, people jump on it as though it's some
huge bogeyman, whether they fully understand it or not. SO2R does NOT mean
you get to listen 100 per cent of the time. (Nobody is that wired.) SO2R
does not mean you're running twice the rate of SO1R. Even the best SO2R ops
admit that most second-radio Qs happen when the first radio is relatively
quiet.
SO2R should be relatively seamless. But it's practice that makes it so.
As for SO2R ops that TX on two bands simultaneously, if that even happens,
well, that is STILL against the rules.
73, kelly
ve4xt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Warren C. Stankiewicz" <nf1j@earthlink.net>
To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2005 4:22 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] SO2R -- revised opinion?
> Kelly, VE4XT writes:
>
> >It's still a legitimate skill worthy of reward and worthy of allowing an
> operator to rise above the pack if he's able to do it.
>
> > If an operator is good enough that while adhering to the
> > single-transmission
> > rule he can juggle two QSOs concurrently, that's a skill he should be
> > proud
> > of.
>
> I think the problem is not with those who are adept at running SO2R. I
think
> the issues I have are with people who are not. Let's face it--it's an
> acquired skill.
>
> I encountered a number of people during SS CW who were clearly not adept;
> and those who simply repeatedly cycled their F1 buttons while trying to
work
> someone on the other radio, only to eventually "get it" and come back to
> their original run frequency.
>
> I'd suggest that if you can't hold your run frequency while working
someone
> on the second radio, you might not be entitled to it. And if I was running
a
> big enough station (i.e., QRO instead of QRP, and with bigger and better
> antennas), I'd be sorely tempted to swipe it.
>
> SS is one of the supreme tests of operating skill. As such, I would like
to
> suggest that it might not be the first place you'd want to test out your
> SO2R skills (especially when the NAQP's are so good for this).
>
> In addition, there are many out there who are hopping on the SO2R
bandwagon
> because it's the "next big thing". This is fine, if they want to spend
that
> much time and money. For me, most of the top contesters I know could still
> wipe the floor with most of us just using one radio--and I'm going to have
> to be a lot better in my operating skill with one before I try with two.
>
> Putting SO2R ops in a separate category is just like packet operation--it
> will only separate out the honest, not the dishonorable.
>
> With malice towards none,
>
> Warren, NF1J
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|