Re: [CQ-Contest] Chiming in -- SO2R

["Russell Hill" <rustyhill@earthlink.net>]

I agree with Steve 100%.  I don't believe I have said it as well.

My suggestion to set up a category defined by antenna height is an attempt 
to have a clear and simple way to classify what Steve has called a "small 
station".

Regardless of what other equipment, a station with a 100 ft tower would 
never be a small station-- folks don't spend that kind of money and effort 
in order to be "King of the Water Pistols".  King of QRP or King of LP, 
maybe, but the intention is to be a big dog in whatever category.

Regardless of what other equipment, a station with a 40 ft tower will never 
become a big dog, not at HF, anyway.

My suggestion of a 50 ft dividing line is arbitrary and open to discussion.

But remembering my relative success with a 55 ft high 8-el monobander in the 
last 10M contest I operated, I do believe any dividing line higher than 50 
ft would be too high, and perhaps it should be 40 or 45 ft.

But whatever the dividing line is, I firmly believe there should be some 
dividing line for the Water Pistols.

Thanks, Steve.

Rusty, na5tr


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Root" <steve.root@culligan4water.com>
To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 3:21 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Chiming in -- SO2R


> >
> > I notice in all your correspondence that you are focused on winning.
> > I am focused on competition.  A casual reader might think that's the
> > same thing, but it isn't quite.
> >
> > A subtle but important distinction.
> >
> > --
> > Bill W6WRT
>
>
> True, but I agree with Ward N0AX that the issue here is recognition. 
> While
> QST did us a great disservice by curtailing their contest coverage, the 
> Web
> reporting has allowed vastly improved regional coverage.  In my opinion
> that's a great help.  We can debate operator skill vs. location vs. 
> hardware
> forever and never get to a consensus but I think we can all agree that we
> need to encourage the casual operator. We need to mentor and assist new
> contestors, and that all of the contest recognition shouldn't fall to the
> same few people every time.
>
> It's very hard for a great operator with a small station in a poor
> geograhical location to be recognized as such.  The solution here isn't to
> penalize those who have invested enormous time and energy into building a
> big station or those who have learned how to operate 2 radios.  The 
> solution
> is to develop a way to reward those efforts that may not end up in the Top
> Ten box every year.
>
> 73 Steve K0SR
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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