[CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R

[Bob Henderson]

There is a fundamental difference here.

SO v MO is obvious - one op and more than one operator.  Team performance 
will exceed single operator performance without any requirement for 
additional single operator skill.

HP v LP.  Performance enhancement without any requirement for improvement in 
operator skill.

Assisited/Unassisted.  Segregated because the use of spotting information 
provided by third parties falls outside the SO criteria.

So why is SO2R different?  It is different because it places substantial 
skill demands upon the operator for benefit to be gained.  Without 
acquisition of these operator skills, which btw aren't so easily come by, 
SO2R is an operator liability.

Before you ask........I have a fully functional SO2R capability.  I have 
invested quite some time in learning to gain advantage from it.  I have 
found only limited success.  Most of my contesting is done SO1R.  I have 
great admiration for those among us who have been able to master the skills 
needed for fully effective SO2R operation.  IMO they deserve to have all the 
advantage this brings them.

I believe that SO2R skills are the most demanding a contester can acquire. 
They do not come easily and require a significant investment.  The time 
taken to learn the operating skills is considerable but for some very 
worthwhile.

I believe I understand SO2R well, though my skill in its use is at best 
modest.  I strongly oppose segregating this leading-,edge skill based 
pursuit into a seperate category.  This would have the effect of reducing 
motivation to acquire these very difficult skills.  Such would move 
contesting backwards not forwards.

We don't want that.

I don't recall ever seeing seperate categories for those using mechanical 
bugs v those with pump handles OR those with el-bugs or keyboards.

Bob, 5B4AGN, P3F



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bill Turner" <dezrat at copper.net>
To: <sawyered at earthlink.net>
Cc: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Sunday, July 30, 2006 2:01 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R


> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 18:17:35 -0400 (GMT-04:00), you wrote:
>
>
>>So please, can we get off of the SO1R vs SO2R thing....
>
> ------------ REPLY SEPARATOR ------------
>
> Shall we also get off the HP/LP thing? The SO/MO thing? The
> assisted/unassisted thing?
>
> Those operations were separated into their own classes because each
> one had a *significant* advantage/disadvantage over the other.
>
> One radio/two radio has a similar significant difference and should be
> treated the same.
>
> Bill, W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>