[CQ-Contest] Packet cheating

[KI9A at aol.com]

In a message dated 7/22/01 10:58:27 AM Central Daylight Time, kq2m at mags.net 
writes:


But lets be VERY clear on this - SO2R without packet is much more
challenging and demanding than SO with packet.  Period!


RIGHT!

Bob, I am not saying SO2R is easy, not at all...I know this, as I have been 
experimenting with it for the past year!  What I am saying is where do we 
draw the line?  As you would agree, SO2R is an an atvantage over single radio 
operation.  With SO2R, you CAN find mults that normally you would not.

It is agreed that in DX contests, tall towers with big mono-banders have an 
advatage over a guy with a low dipole. Even if both are in the small power 
class.  What, no class for big antennas? ( yeah, WPX has T/S class...) 

You hear very little, if anything, about making SO2R a seperate class. You 
hear very little if anything about making a class for guys with antennas over 
50'.  Or mono-banders. Or stacks. Or 1500 watts compared to 600.  

Bottom line is this, you need to increase your skills ( SO2R ), or increase 
your hardware ( packet, towers, big amps, ect. ) to increase your score.  Why 
not just bunch packet in with these other items?  Computer logging is in most 
cases better than paper, electronic keyers better than straight keys,  SO2R 
over single,  solid state rigs & amps over tube type, and on and on.  We just 
don't need so many classes, period.  Do SO2R guys work thier butts off? Damn 
right! Are packet cheaters lazy? Absolutly...

-Chuck KI9A


--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com