To: | sawyered@earthlink.net |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R |
From: | Bill Turner <dezrat@copper.net> |
Reply-to: | dezrat@copper.net |
Date: | Sat, 29 Jul 2006 19:01:06 -0700 |
List-post: | <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com> |
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 |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesting in the Sunlight [was: SO1R and SO2R], Bill Turner |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesting in the Sunlight [was: SO1R and SO2R], Radiosporting Fan |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R, sawyered |
Next by Thread: | Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R, Craig Cook |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |