CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] SO2R vs SO1R

To: k9yc <k9yc@arrl.net>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] SO2R vs SO1R
From: "Alan M. Eshleman" <doctore@well.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2017 14:10:52 -0700 (PDT)
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Thanks for the nice words, Jim.  My personal opinion is that SO2R and SO1R 
should be separate categories in all contests.  

73,

Alan, K6SRZ

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Brown" <k9yc@audiosystemsgroup.com>
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 12:45:07 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] SO2R vs SO1R

On 8/8/2017 7:42 AM, Dave Edmonds wrote:
> The concern I saw was that there were no SO1R stations anywhere
> near the top scores in the NAQP LP category. There was a very wide score 
> margin between the two types of operation too...

K6SRZ is a superb operator with a modest station about 100 miles N of 
me. He never works SO2R, while I nearly always do. In most contests that 
we're both taking seriously, he usually beats me by 10-20%. In NAQP CW 
last weekend, he beat me 131K to 108K.

73, Jim K9YC

_______________________________________________
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

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