[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] High Rate Dual Radio CQing

To: "cq-contest@contesting.com" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] High Rate Dual Radio CQing
From: Eric Gruff <eric@e4consult.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 22:26:31 +0000
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Just to add my $0.02 to all these discussions on categories and 

I think for single operator, at least, there should only be categories based on 
power. If I'm running SOHP one radio unassisted, I have a much better chance 
(based on my experience) in beating an assisted op (also one radio) in the same 
power category than I do against SO2R at HP. Yet, if the SO2R op isn't using 
assistance, he's lumped in with me as unassisted. I have run both assisted vs 
unassisted (one radio) in many contests, and I'm not convinced that packet 
spots and the like make a huge difference other than to complete sweeps and 
find rare multipliers. From what I can tell, SO2R is a huge advantage, so why 
would I have to compete against that category as "unassisted"?

Let's just assume that SO2R, packet use (or not), dual watch receivers, etc. 
are all just tools that good ops can use to their advantage. Power categories 
are a way to balance things out, but you can argue that we should also have 
categories for antennas. At any power level, does an op using a single 
multiband dipole or vertical stand any chance against another station with 
multiple 100' towers and huge monoband yagis, etc.? Talk about an unfair 
competition! I'm not complaining here - I just think most of what we're arguing 
over is completely random in the big picture.

73 and see you this weekend (using HP, one radio and a very long inverted vee 
antenna, probably with "assistance" from the spotting network).

Eric NC6K
CQ-Contest mailing list

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