[CQ-Contest] High Rate Dual Radio CQing

ve4xt at mymts.net ve4xt at mymts.net
Mon Dec 7 10:06:21 EST 2015

Hi Steve,

I submit that's not the point of SO2R, it's merely the level of proficiency most users have settled into. These folks have simply evolved past that level.

I was reacting to the suggestion, though admittedly not by you, there was something illegal about the practice or that there needed to be a new category. Contesting is unique in that it's one sport where people of all different abilities compete. If you were a sprinter but can't get your time in the 100 down to the 10-seconds range, guaranteed you're not going to line up next to Usain Bolt. If you're a driver who has trouble driving safely at 55, guaranteed you're never lining up behind Jeff Gordon. 

But in contesting, the bad drivers and slow sprinters are in the same field as the Usain Bolts and Jeff Gordons. To some people, it seems that means we need to tie an anchor to Usain or give Jeff Gordon a restrictor plate. I would prefer we marvel at and celebrate the abilities of ZF2MJ et al. 

I'm pretty sure I will never be at that level, but that's my fault. It's not up to these folks or contest organizers to dumb anyone down to my level. 

73, Kelly 

Sent from my iPad

> On Dec 7, 2015, at 8:10 AM, Steve London <n2icarrl at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 12/06/2015 07:27 PM, Kelly Taylor wrote:
>> Hi Steve,
>> Granted, however, if you have good antenna systems on both bands (and good propagation on both) and you’re running dueling CQs, isn’t a potential outcome of both CQs an answer to each, and the ability to answer each in sequence? Wasn’t that the point of SO2R in the first place?
> No. The point of SO2R, for the vast majority of SO2R users, is to run on one radio, while S&P on another radio, with a lockout to prevent transmitting on both radios simultaneously.
> 73,
> Steve, N2IC

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list