[CQ-Contest] SO2R vs SO1R

[Dick Green]

I would enjoy competing on a completely level playing field once in a while,
if that were truly possible. Unfortunately, in your example it's not
possible:

1 & 2: If I use an FT-1000D and you use an ICOM 751, I'm going to beat you.
Unless everyone uses the same exact radio, it won't be fair. I have an
advantage if I use a Heil Pro Set and you use a pair of hi-fi headphones and
a hand mic. If I use Writelog and you manually log, you're toast. If my
electronic keyer has more features than yours, I make more QSOs. My Bencher
paddle will beat your straight key.

3 & 4: Are we supposed to use manufacturer's specs to determine antenna
gain? It's virtually impossible to compare gain figures from one
manufacturer to another. What about antennas that have better F/B or better
bandwidth? A "10 dBi" antenna on one of my 50' portable towers is going to
lose to a 10 dBi antenna on a 100' tower. If our towers are more than 100'
feet from the shack, and I use hardline and you use RG-213, I'm going to
beat you on 10M. What about terrain? NT1N is going to beat many other
stations from his obstructed CT hilltop. What about location? In any DX
contest, the East Coasters are going to maul the rest of the country.

You can't level the playing field in contesting as if it were duplicate
bridge. The best we can do is define "roughly equal" categories. WRTC
assigns a limited number of participants to radio stations that are judged
to be roughly equal in all respects. But you can't do that in a wide-open
contest where people operate from home. There are just too many ways to gain
subtle but definitive advantages with equipment and antennas. That's why the
best measure will always be the number of operators.

Even if we could create a "WRTC" category as you suggest, it makes no sense
to lump everyone else into an "Unlimited" category. How in the world could a
single op beat a multi? Nobody would want to participate in this category
except monster multis.

Though I would like to try my hand at a WRTC-style contest, I wouldn't like
it as a steady diet. Part of what I enjoy is tweaking my station to squeeze
out more QSOs. It's very gratifying to buy a used, beat-up old tribander and
fix it SE on a tree for a few more mults or a quick switch to work a
Carribean station. Experimenting with making communications more and more
effective is a big part of Amateur radio, so I think the practice is very
appropriate in contesting. And it's not mutually exclusive with the
development of greater levels of skill. I'm convinced that will always be
the best way to improve my score.

73, Dick WC1M




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Turner [mailto:w7ti at dslextreme.com]
> Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2001 7:13 PM
> To: dick.green at valley.net
> Cc: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] SO2R vs SO1R
>
>
> On Sun, 29 Jul 2001 14:13:00 -0400, Dick Green wrote:
>
> >So, once again, the categories and rules are pretty good as they stand.
>
> _________________________________________________________
>
> I agree with many of your observations, but not the last one, above.
>
> It really comes down to what it is you want to achieve in a contest.  If
> you want to maximize the score, SO2R is the way to go, no doubt about
> it.  IMO, I think it's more fun to take an "average" station, whatever
> that is, and see how well you can do with it.  That is what WRTC
> attempts to do, and I have the greatest respect for their approach.
>
> What if WRTC said "Ok, guys, you can each set up your stations however
> you want, and may the best team win".  It COULD be done that way, but it
> would lose all interest for me.  When a WRTC winning team emerges, they
> are indeed the best.
>
> Here's what I'd like to see happen with the classes:
>
> Class WRTC (or call it what you like):
> 1.  One radio.  When the transmitter is on, the receiver is off.
> 2.  The receiver must receive only one channel at a time.  No
>     multiplexing, no spectrum displays.
> 3.  All antennas for 20/15/10 must have no more than 10 dbi gain.
> 4.  All antennas for 160/80/40 must have no more than 4 dbi gain.
> 5.  Only one antenna per band - no switching among separate antennas.
> 6.  The antenna may be rotated.
> 7.  Maximum power out of the transmitter is 100 watts.
> 8.  Unlimited band changes.
> 9.  No spotting assistance or self-spotting.
> 10.  One operator.
>
> Class Unlimited:
> 1.  Anything goes, within the rules of your license class.  Multiple
> transmitters, multiple operators, anything.
>
> And there could be QRP divisions within the above classes.
>
> This not only simplifies the classes we have today, but those who wish
> to compete on a level playing field in terms of hardware could, those
> who wish to push technology to the max could do that too.  Something for
> everybody.
>
> It all goes back to my original reason for posting:  to make competition
> fairer and more balanced.  I have NEVER had the intention of
> discouraging SO2R in any way.  I even do it myself from time to time.
>
> Comments are welcome.
>
> 73, Bill W7TI


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