Tom, The high power and multi-operator categories have existed since the beginning of contesting. In both cases, particularly the multi-operator case, they represent significant fundamental departure
K8VT writes in regard to high Power and Multi Op categories: Multiple operator categories are fundamentally different than single operator contesting ... there are more operators and more transmitter
Bill, If you are going to base everything on perceived advantage then you must include categories for "towers taller than x feet," "antennas with gain > 2.1 dBi," "antennas with gain > 6 dBd," etc. I
So? It's still multiple operators, that means more "seat time" more time to do other things, someone else to handle all those thing that some "mere mortals" can't do while they operate but are necess
That's the definition of a contest ... Again, so what? Big antennas get you significantly more points than single element antennas - I don't see you supporting a "single element antenna" category? SO
Yes we disagree ... AA5AU has proven rather conclusively that in the hands of a skilled operator SO2R is an advantage equivalent to big antennas. However, that also proves that antennas are a signifi
The problem is that any rule you propose applies to "all" not "most." 73, ... Joe, W4TV _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.c
So what? How many QSOs did each 2 radio station make on the second radio? How many mults would not have been worked were it not for the second radio? How many hours of operation for each of these sta
Doug asks, Contests distinguish between high and low power for historical reasons. From the very earliest contests - in the days of single element antennas (often a Marconi T or inverted L), it was c
That works only if you are also willing to include ANTENNAS as a "significant advantage." As I have said over and over, if you want a "fair" category, make it one transceiver and single element anten
You are absolutely wrong ... time does not enter into the issue at all. Every operator has the same 12, 24, or 48 hours as defined by the contest. Time is simply another way of saying "efficiency" ..
Sure ... some SO2R ops with modest antennas and low power can beat some SO1R High power ops - so what? Why should it be a surprise when any tool helps a station produce a better result. The top conte
Tom, given big antennas most ops will significantly improve their scores. Contest scores show that EVERY time. If you want to put SOxR in a separate category you have to treat gain antennas the same
I'm not saying that SOxR isn't an advantage. I'm saying that it is not the overwhelming advantage you claim it is. SOxR is no different than and equivalent to an antenna upgrade .... e.g., it allows
It is an advantage to the extend that antenna availability/selection is an advantage. No we have not "debunked" the beam theory and we have not debunked the skills theory. Every one of them is a too
Your analysis is completely flawed ... the only valid comparisons are: "how many additional QSOs were made on the second radio" and "how many unique multipliers were made on the second radio." Until
I don't know that power levels are particularly defensible either but they have been a "fact of life" for at least 40 years. I'm not willing to accept a change in the status quo for either SOxR or p
Single Operator assisted is one in which the operator receives SPOTTING ASSISTANCE. It is, truly a different category because the operator no longer performs all the functions himself. A SOxR operat
Bill, You did not propose that ... you would have allowed gain antennas (three element Yagi) and unlimited height. If you are willing to eliminate ALL the hardware advantage, that's fine. Don't try t
Mike, Perhaps in CQWW RTTY ... but that contest is also relatively young compared to CQWW CW/SSB, Sweepstakes, ARRL DX, etc. All of those have had separate high/low power categories for as long as I