> AA5AU has also commented that with SO2R, his score improved about 40%
> above his SO1R score.
And this proves what? If an operator improves his CW technique by
learning to copy at 30 WPM instead of 8 WPM, his score will go up
by 40% (or more).
You are trying to create separate entry classes based on nothing more
than operating technique (call it skill). That's not the way it has
ever been done in radio sport.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rtty-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:rtty-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bill Turner
> Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 11:18 AM
> To: rtty@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] CQ-Contest SO2R
>
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 12:47:12 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
> <w4tv@subich.com> wrote:
>
> > AA5AU has commented more than once
> >that since he could not possibly have a big antenna farm, he adopted
> >SO2R to allow him to compete against the guys with big antennas
> >(he does might well
>
> ------------ REPLY FOLLOWS ------------
>
> AA5AU has also commented that with SO2R, his score improved about 40%
> above his SO1R score. That is a comparable advantage to HP vs LP, and
> like HP vs LP, deserves its own category.
>
> The playing field can not be made perfectly level, but we should try
> any reasonable means to make it so. NOT doing so reduces competition
> and ultimately will cause contesters to give it up and go somewhere
> else to have fun.
>
> Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
>
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|