Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+SO1R\s+vs\.\s+SO2R\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+SO1R\s+vs\.\s+SO2R\s*$/: 25 ]

Total 25 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R (score: 1): Author: sawyered@earthlink.net; Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2006 18:17:35 -0400 (GMT-04:00); Guys. My situation over the past few years is a "case study" on what is really important. 2 years ago, I moved a full bore SO2R set up (FT1000MP/FT990, Dunestars, 6-pack, DXDoubler, Hard Line, etc.); /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00564.html (8,116 bytes)
2. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R (score: 1): Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@copper.net>; Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2006 19:01:06 -0700; ORIGINAL MESSAGE: -- 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; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00571.html (7,276 bytes)
3. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R (score: 1): Author: "Craig Cook" <craig.n7or@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2006 19:43:30 -0700; 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 work; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00573.html (8,934 bytes)
4. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>; Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2006 23:38:07 -0400; Bill, let this die ... until you are willing to add antenna systems into the mix (tribander at 50', tribander stacks, monoband stacks, and bigger) SO1R/SO2R is of no consequence. Multiple Operator an; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00576.html (8,264 bytes)
5. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R (score: 1): Author: sawyered@earthlink.net; Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2006 01:19:45 -0400 (GMT-04:00); Nothing will get you off that, Bill. How about the big vs. little antenna system, hard line vs. crappy coax, number of miles from the Atlantic in DX contests, number of miles from the Northeast in Do; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00577.html (8,836 bytes)
6. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R (score: 1): Author: "Bob Henderson" <bob@5b4agn.net>; Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2006 05:36:36 -0000; There is a fundamental difference here. SO v MO is obvious - one op and more than one operator. Team performance will exceed single operator performance without any requirement for additional single; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00578.html (10,522 bytes)
7. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R (score: 1): Author: "Peter Voelpel" <df3kv@t-online.de>; Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2006 14:30:25 +0200; Perhaps you will find some more differences to get you into your own class without competition, people able to keep on their seat for 48 hours for instance should have their own class ;-)) Shall we a; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00581.html (7,872 bytes)
8. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R (score: 1): Author: "VE5ZX" <ve5zx@hotmail.com>; Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2006 08:36:43 -0600; So do I Agreed! BUT! Even the most unpractised SO2R op can acquire a few more mults than an SO1R op. When I converted to SO1.5R before changing to SO2R and used it in a contest I immediately gained; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00584.html (9,158 bytes)
9. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R (score: 1): Author: "Paul O'Kane" <pokane@ei5di.com>; Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2006 16:08:21 +0100; HP makes your signal louder. Any operator, regardless of ability or experience is likely to better with a louder signal. It's self-evident that HP is an advantage. This is a "hardware issue". It's se; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00585.html (9,745 bytes)
10. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R (score: 1): Author: George Fremin III <geoiii@kkn.net>; Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2006 08:06:55 -0700; Most of what I have seen has been people saying they are against a new category. Over the history of the CQ-Contest list you will find similar calls for new categories by someone and there will alway; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00586.html (11,183 bytes)
11. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R (score: 1): Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@copper.net>; Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2006 08:07:45 -0700; ORIGINAL MESSAGE: -- REPLY SEPARATOR -- If you want to propose a rule change for those situations, go ahead. I'm focusing on one radio vs two. Bill, W6WRT ____________________________________________; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00587.html (8,985 bytes)
12. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R (score: 1): Author: "Tom Osborne" <w7why@verizon.net>; Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2006 08:51:01 -0700; If you would like to see how this debate plays out, go to the RTTY reflector and read the archives. This exact argument went on there for a couple of weeks with the same statements. Tom W7WHY ______; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00590.html (8,541 bytes)
13. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R (score: 1): Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@copper.net>; Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2006 09:03:36 -0700; ORIGINAL MESSAGE: -- REPLY SEPARATOR -- Absolutely correct. What you don't see however, is that when two highly skilled operators compete in an otherwise equal situation, the two radio setup will win; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00591.html (10,462 bytes)
14. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R (score: 1): Author: "John Langdon" <jlangdon@outer.net>; Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2006 12:04:06 -0500; How about separate classes for those with supportive spouses (make meals, cover the telephone, let dogs in and out, etc.), versus neutral spouses (leave for the contest weekend) versus unsupportive s; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00593.html (10,249 bytes)
15. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>; Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2006 13:36:31 -0400; SO2R ops already face off against each other in every contest. Why is it that the SO1R ops want a "handicap" rather than make the effort to improve their skills and station to compete at the top lev; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00594.html (10,309 bytes)
16. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R (score: 1): Author: "VE5ZX" <ve5zx@hotmail.com>; Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2006 12:08:37 -0600; Hmmm - according to this logic learning to 'flipping a switch' to turn on a KW doesn't deserve a separate category either! Syl _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00596.html (9,199 bytes)
17. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>; Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2006 15:10:31 -0400; Power classes are a historical artifact that, in most cases, predate ready availability and general use of directional (gain) antennas. However, as long as various administrations have power limits t; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00598.html (10,040 bytes)
18. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R (score: 1): Author: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@mts.net>; Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2006 15:49:13 -0500; I don't dispute the 40 per cent advantage claimed by AA5AU, but to even suggest that same 40 per cent advantage carries over into operator-decoded modes is, I think, misleading. There is an advantage; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00601.html (13,642 bytes)
19. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R (score: 1): Author: "Peter Voelpel" <df3kv@t-online.de>; Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2006 23:09:21 +0200; If you want to propose a rule change do it with the contest sponsors, its getting boring now number of miles from the Atlantic in DX contests, number of miles from the Northeast in Domestic contests; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00602.html (9,136 bytes)
20. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R (score: 1): Author: "VE5ZX" <ve5zx@hotmail.com>; Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2006 15:44:22 -0600; Right on! Your experience on RTTY is similar to mine on CW/SSB. I can easily add a few mults over the course of a contest without decreasing my SO1R performance. Even without skill SO2R has technica; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00603.html (9,768 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]