[CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

W6WRT writes: 

> One of the top RTTY contesters, AA5AU, who has won every plaque in
> sight, stated that going to SO2R gave him about a 40% score advantage.
> That's for the SAME operator, SAME location and SAME station except
> for the second radio.

Bill takes Don's comments out of context and makes them into something 
they are not.  

Don commented that he felt he got about 40% more out of his station
by using SO2R.  However, Don's station was handicapped by antennas 
in the "attic dipole" class when he started using SO2R.  In fact, Don
admits he went to SO2R to help close the gap against the HP/big antenna 
types. 

Don's antennas are still quite modest - a pair of A3 at 40/60 feet, 
D40 dipole at 70' and a Butternut vertical.  He credits SO2R with 
less than 40% additional score now that he has directional antennas 
and it is hard to quantify the difference if he had "big" antennas. 

On the other hand, one can compare Don's scores to other top RTTY 
ops - both SO1R and SO2R - with big antennas and note that Don 
does as well or better than most regardless of antenna.  I suspect 
most of the remaining difference is the added skill that Don has 
developed by using SO2R for many years as well as the knowledge of 
propagation and the habits of the rare multipliers he has learned 
out of the necessity of needing to be quicker/smarter than the 
big boys. 

For Bill to claim it's all hardware - as he does - is a disservice 
to Don and every other elite operator.  It completely ignores the
operator's contribution to the result ... remember hardware alone 
never made a single QSO.  

73, 

   ... Joe, W4TV