[CQ-Contest] Here we go again

[Mike Fatchett, W0MU]

 I want my own category so I can win every time.

I could have the best station in the world and lose because of a better
op....There are just a few :-) Band conditions will have a huge effect.

I can use my own station in Montana for a perfect example.  Here is the run
down:

Station 1
Icom 756 Pro II
XM240 at  75 ft
SteppIR 4ele at 65 ft
Inverted vee for 75 at 60 ft.

Station 2
Ft-1000MP 
Cushcraft R8

In the last SSB SS contest the 2nd radio had little value.  A taller tower
and bigger antennas might have helped but we did not get the same openings
as the west coast and south stations.  ZERO contacts on 10 and a decent run
on 15 the first day with very little on day two.  I could have easily
plugged in a FT-857 or lower end rig for the 2nd radio and did just as well.

As of right now I am sitting in 8th place...I hope to stay in the top 10.
Compare my station with the stations above me.  With the right conditions
smaller stations can do just fine.  

Would my money have been better spent in a bigger or more towers??
Absolutely!!!  Other less expensive add-ons I would have like to have had
were decent receiving antennas.  The west coast guys were plenty strong even
off the back of the beam.  Many q's lost due to qrm.  I can't recall having
such a hard time finding a run frequency as I did this year.  A full sized
40 and rotatable on 80 on a 200 ft.  tower would be nice but not practical
in my situation.  We have a saying in Colorado and it applies to Montana
that if you have to spend much time on 80 it is going to be a long weekend. 

A second radio in a modest station is not going to generate an extra 500
contacts.  It will allow you to search for mults, work stations you might
not otherwise work on a band that is partially open.  It is not a cure-all
for lack of antennas and towers.

Having a 2nd radio available at the flip of a switch is also nice insurance
if you loose your main rig.

Mike
W0MU
  
-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Kelly Taylor
Sent: Friday, November 26, 2004 3:28 PM
To: Bill Coleman; ak0a
Cc: CQ-Contest
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Here we go again

Here's the one thing I simply don't get about the anti-SO2R argument:

I can have multiple 200-foot towers with multiple stacked monobanders for
every band, thousands of dollars in Stackmatches, Top Ten band decoder, an
IC7800 and a full-size elevated four-square for 160 plus an Alpha to feed it
all 1.5kw through tens of thousands of dollars of hardline and that draws no
argument.

But, if I have a shortened beam at 30 feet, a homebrew 4-400A amp that's
hardly ever used, a TS-850SAT as my main radio and a TS-130s feeding an
HF6V, and somehow that's an unfair advantage that means I should be punted
into a different category?

Hello. What am I missing? The multiple towers are certainly a much better
advantage than a second radio.

Why is one a monetary unfairness while the other is just life we have to
live with?

SO2R is a SKILL distinction, not a monetary one. Skill should be rewarded,
not marginalized by being punted into some different category.

Create a new category for SO1R and let folk opt in if they wish.

Don't force SO2R stations into a different category. I'd be willing to bet
that many of the top-running SO1R ops now would take a pass at the new
category anyway, for the chance to play giant killer.

Just like not all SO1R stations are tribanders at 50 feet and wires, not all
SO2R stations are superstations. Superops, yes, but not necessarily
superstations.

Folk who get beat by SO2R ops are simply getting beat by better ops. All the
scapegoating in the world is not going to change that.

Single operator refers only to the operator. Let's leave it like that.

73, kelly
ve4xt


----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Coleman" <aa4lr at mac.com>
To: "ak0a" <ak0a at kc.rr.com>
Cc: "CQ-Contest" <CQ-Contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, November 26, 2004 10:37 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Here we go again


>
> On Nov 23, 2004, at 7:11 PM, ak0a wrote:
>
> > The only rule change in various contest should be the two Radio 
> > operations listed as a separate category.
>
> Why? It's just one operator and a single transmitter.
>
> > Single radio stations do not stand a chance of winning anything....
>
> That's not true. Single radio stations do quite well. There's likely 
> to be several single radio stations in the top 10 of every category.
>
> > and Yes, not everyone can afford to build a two radio contest station.
>
> A two radio contest station is not expensive. That's a myth. You can 
> pick up a second transceiver for less than $500 at any hamfest. A used 
> vertical might set you back $200. Many hams have HF transceivers in 
> their cars -- bring it into the hamshack for the contest.
>
> > it is for this reason that I do not send in logs anymore and yes I 
> > work every contest that comes along. MHO.
>
> Real contesters send in their logs for every event -- no matter how 
> small. They recognise that their logs are important for judging the 
> results of the other operators. And even small scores can help our 
> their contest club.
>
> Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL        Mail: aa4lr at arrl.net
> Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!"
>              -- Wilbur Wright, 1901
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

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