CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R

To: "CQ Contest" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R
From: "Craig Cook" <craig.n7or@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2006 19:43:30 -0700
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
And.... 2 radio guys can hold a CQ frequency on one band while working
someone they searched out on the other. Many just keep CQing and not
answering calling stations until they are ready to. It works good ;-)

On 7/29/06, Bill Turner <dezrat@copper.net> wrote:
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 18:17:35 -0400 (GMT-04:00), you wrote:
>
>
> >So please, can we get off of the SO1R vs SO2R thing....
>
> ------------ REPLY SEPARATOR ------------
>
> Shall we also get off the HP/LP thing? The SO/MO thing? The
> assisted/unassisted thing?
>
> Those operations were separated into their own classes because each
> one had a *significant* advantage/disadvantage over the other.
>
> One radio/two radio has a similar significant difference and should be
> treated the same.
>
> Bill, W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>



-- 
73, Craig Cook - N7OR in Sandy, OR
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>