[CQ-Contest] Skimmer musings

[R P Davis]

Guy Molinari wrote:
> Bob,
>     SO2R is about a human being developing the skills to decode two 
> audio streams.   One in each ear.   It is hard to learn and if done 
> incorrectly will actually reduce your score.   This is proven fact and 
> not an opinion.  
>  
> Skimmer can simultaneously decode dozens and perhaps hundreds of streams 
> outside the range of human hearing and over a 96 khz swath of 
> spectrum.   I suspect Alex is working on parallelizing this further and 
> perfecting this technology.   He is a very capable guy and there is no 
> doubt in my mind that he will succeed.
>  
> For those of us who view contesting as a sport, this understanding is 
> the heart and soul of the debate.

Guy,

I understand that SO2R is difficult to learn and even more difficult to 
master.  I have not yet begun on that path (as my scores in recent 
contests will show!), though I hope to give such a challenge a try some 
day.

I suspect that successful integration of Skimmer into one's contest 
operation is going to have a learning curve, too.  Granted, nowhere near 
as steep, but still a curve.  Didn't we see testimony on this list that 
Skimmer wasn't all sunshine and roses?   As another poster noted, 
successfully making the Q has yet to be done; you have to tune, 
identify, and actually bust through the QRN and QRM to make the Q.

It's important to note that I'm not really advocating anything, here. 
Maybe Skimmer use makes one Assisted.  Maybe not.  All I'm saying is 
that it's an interesting piece of technology that has, IMO, twisted the 
knickers of too many people.  Competitors who are looking for the 
latest, most cutting-edge technical advantage will use whatever they can 
get to give them a perceived 'edge', whether that's Skimmer or automatic 
keying or automated transmitting setups. [*]

The rest of us, like me, will continue to spin their SO1R knobs and use 
their ears, getting pounded in the score-box by both SO2R ops and 
Skimmer ops.

Cheers,

Bob NQ3X

[*] Am I the only one who thinks that outlawing or categorizing 
automated receiving technology, while allowing all manner of automated 
transmitting technology, is logically inconsistent?