CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R

To: "'VE5ZX'" <ve5zx@hotmail.com>, <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R
From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2006 13:36:31 -0400
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>

> It appears that for some strange reason SO2R ops are afraid 
> to face-off against one another. It seems they would rather 
> remain anonymous in a crowd of SO1R ops. Very strange!

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 level?  

> This argument can be settled once and for all. All that is 
> need is information. Simply report which stations are running 
> SO2R even by putting an asterisk beside the call of ops using 
> SO2R. Even better - the sponsors only need to report it in the 
> on-line scores. 

That's BS ... nobody ever demanded that those who learned to send 
CW with their left ("off") hand while they tuned the radio and 
logged with their right hand be identified separately.  Those 
who used memory keyers when everyone else used bugs (or straight 
keys) were not identified separately.  Second receivers, second 
stations, etc. have been a fact of life in contesting since the 
50s.  It's simply that the other tools - particularly computer 
logging - have become so common place that most of the other skill 
issues have been removed.  

Ever notice that those screaming loudest to exile SO2R operators 
from the single operator class are RTTY ops - those for whom the 
computer does the most and where, presumably operator skill is 
smallest contribution to station performance? 

73, 

   ... Joe, W4TV 

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

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