[CQ-Contest] I finally get it !!!

[Tom Haavisto]

Hi Eric

Following your logic, you seem to indicate that simply adding more hardware
and real estate is all that is needed to win.  I don't buy it.

If station 1 is in Maine, station 2 in Florida, station 3 in Texas and
station 4 in North Dakota, other factors come into play.  Is it a DX
contest?  Station 1 will win hands down - maybe.  Depends on the time of
year, sunspot cycle, and a host of other factors.  NAQP?  Other factors come
into play.  Look at the 10 meter contest last year - the folks in Texas
cleaned up.

One of the neat things about contesting is that spending money and adding
hardware is no guarantee of success.  Other factors come in to play.  Local
ground conditions for one.  Local thunderstoms and noise.  Did it rain
recently?  Are things super dry and hydro poles are arcing, making noise.
Did it rain, and you have water in the traps on your tribander?  And the
magic equalizer - propagation.  Do all the ops have the same skill level?
Same radios, or are some equipped with roofing filters?  CW or SSB contest?
What if your kids are sick, or you did not sleep well last night?  These,
and a thousand other things come into play.

SO2R is a tool - one of many.  Just as adding more hardware is no guarantee
of success, SO2R is no guarantee of a higher score.


Tom


On 2/7/08, Eric Hilding <b38 at hilding.com> wrote:
>
> I finally get it !!!
>
>
>
> About 6AM this morning I was in the kitchen (a favorite Locust hangout)
> and
> a Revelation occurred about the SO1R vs. SO2R controversy.
>
>
>
> It's really all so simple.  As all contesters age in years (plus more SO2R
> stations emerge), this is why we should all get excited about being able
> to
> look forward to many more Low Power Little Pistol SO1R Contest Station
> operators being willing to grind out more and more hours in-the-chair so
> that everyone can reap more QSOs in their logs.  But it's not just about
> SO1R vs. SO2R - it's  also about the typical station configurations
> involved
> (not to mention the tremendous investment differentials).
>
>
>
> Back in the Dark Ages (pre-QRP Category implementation) when 95% of the
> Contesters had only a  tribander and a wire antenna or two, the basic two
> category (High Power and Low Power) schema had some realistic meaning.
> But
> things have changed over time that most likely never crossed the minds of
> those who made the rules.  Or, perhaps the rule makers were actually
> sadistic visionaries who in fact saw the future, and decided to lock in
> eventual controversy by casting the simplistic HP/LP rules into concrete
> and
> stone and declaring no further changes thereto.
>
>
>
> Consider the following comparison of four example types of 100w Low Power
> Category contest stations (two SO1R and two SO2R configurations):
>
>
>
>
> CC&R CHALLENGED 100 WATT SO1R STATION
>
> *Small lot or Apartment/Condo venue
>
> *One stealth low all band wire or vertical antenna
>
> *Single TXRX @100w
>
> *One computer with contest logging software
>
>
>
> MODEST LPCS 100 WATT SO1R STATION:
>
> *Small 60x100 sq.ft lot or slightly larger
>
> *Tribander with 14ft boom on a 40ft tower
>
> *80/40m inverted vee suspended from the tower
>
> *Single TXRX @ 100w
>
> *One two-position manual coax switch
>
> *One computer with contest logging software
>
>
>
> MODESTLY COMPETITIVE 100 WATT SO2R STATION:
>
> *Quarter or one-half acre lot (minimum)
>
> *Stacked 24ft boom tribanders on a 70ft tower with a 40m 2el Shortie-Forty
> at 80ft
>
> *Separate 54ft tower with 2nd tribander
>
> *80m inverted vee hung from 70ft tower
>
> *160m shunt-fed tower (the 70 footer)
>
> *Two TXRX's @ 100w each
>
> *Two Automatic Band Decoders
>
> *Two Automatic Bandpass Filters
>
> *One Automatic Array Solutions SIX PAK antenna switch (or equivalent)
>
> *One computer with contest logging software (possibly with a 2nd Monitor)
>
> *One or more Skimmers
>
>
>
> VERY COMPETITIVE 100 WATT SO2R STATION:
>
> *Five or more acre parcel (minimum)
>
> *Stacked monobanders on 2 or 3 towers at 90ft to 120ft
>
> *Stacked 3el or 4el 40m yagis on 120ft to 150ft tower
>
> *Separate tall towers with 20/15/10 monobanders or stack tribanders
>
> *80m 4 square, phased loops or a 2el 80m yagi on a tall separate tower
>
> *160m 4 square and/or separate one-quarter wave slopers (4 directions)
>
> *Multiple direction 500ft plus RX-only beverages
>
> *Two TXRX's @ 100w each
>
> *Two Automatic Band Decoders
>
> *Two Automatic Bandpass Filters
>
> *One Automatic Array Solutions SIX PAK antenna switch (or equivalent)
>
> *One computer with contest logging software (possibly with a 2nd Monitor)
>
> *One or more Skimmers
>
>
>
> WOW!!!  To think that the operators of all four of the above station types
> get to be judged equally in any contest Low Power category is simply
> amazing!!!
>
>
>
> What is even more amazing is that there are Contesters who actually
> *think*
> that a sharp, skilled SO1R operator with a Little Pistol SO1R Contest
> Station as depicted in Example #1 should be able to  competitively end up
> with a higher Low Power Category score than a equally skilled but
> proficient
> SO2R operator using the station type in Example #4.
>
>
>
> This is beyond amazing - it is mind-blowing!!!
>
>
>
> Yes, Contesting should be able to attract a lot of new young LPCS blood
> into
> the RadioSport with this schema, and motivate the current lower end
> station
> setup LPCS ops to spend more time in the chair to try and win *something*.
> I guess it's time to practice typing skills to be able to more quickly
> (and
> accurately) enter the deluge of increased rate QSOs into your logging
> software.
>
>
>
> WOW. I finally get it !!!
>
>
>
> 73.
>
>
>
> Rick, K6VVA * The Locust
>
> Producer, NCCC SO2R CLINIC v1.0 DVD Video
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>