[CQ-Contest] PJ4G ARRL DX SSB Recording by N2IC

Wed Mar 15 15:00:18 EDT 2017

I think its a function of who decided to put in the time to play radio 
and who was serious versus casual.  I can absolutely guarantee you that 
if K5ZD was operating one station SO-Unassisted and operated for 45 
hours and K5ZD's evil twin was operating another station SO-Assisted and 
operated for 45 hours, that the assisted score is going to beat the 
unassisted score - handily.

Indeed in 2014 when the SO-A and SO-U records were set for the USA, K5ZD 
beat K3CR by nearly 2,000,000 points - thanks in large part to a nearly 
150 multiplier increase in countries alone.

73 Rich NN3W

On 3/15/2017 11:29 AM, Martin Durham wrote:
> Interesting data points from 2016 cqww cw
>
> Combine the top 30 SOHP and SOHPA, and 87% of the top 60 stations were SO2R
>
> 73% of the top 30 SOHP stations were SO2R
>
> 60% of the top 30 SOHPA stations were SO2R.
>
> The top nine SO2R unassisted were higher scores than the top SO2R assisted.
>
> Yes, just one contest worth of data points but interesting.
>
> Maybe the SOA 1 radio guys are getting the short end of the stick.
>
> AND...there were only 30 entries total in MM. probably half of those stations have the capability (my guess) to run two stations in band.
>
> All the data was taken from 3830scores so there could be some calls that didn't submit a score there.
>
> Marty
> W1MD
>
> On Mar 14, 2017, at 4:27 PM, Ria Jairam <rjairam at gmail.com<mailto:rjairam at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Never understood that myself...
>
> THAT is something I'd like to see addressed. SO2R is essentially almost as advantageous as multi-op.
>
> This, IMO, is more "unfair" than a few people using unclaimed assistance and entering as SO unassisted.
>
> Ria
> N2RJ
>
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 10:45 AM, N2TK, Tony <tony.kaz at verizon.net<mailto:tony.kaz at verizon.net>> wrote:
> So if using twice the spectrum, which I agree, why are SO2R and SO1R in the
> same category? One could be running on two bands while the other can only
> run one band at a time.
> N2TK, Tony
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com<mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com>] On Behalf Of
> Martin Durham
> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2017 9:30 PM
> To: Barry <w2up at comcast.net<mailto:w2up at comcast.net>>
> Cc: cq-contest at contesting.com<mailto:cq-contest at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] PJ4G ARRL DX SSB Recording by N2IC
>
> That's not using two frequencies?? A good SO2R is cqing on one freq and
> either dueling CQs on a second freq or working multi. If time right
> transmits and receives make this a finely choreographed dance. Absolutely
> SO2R is using twice the spectrum that a SO1R is using.
>
> Marty
> W1MD
>
>> On Mar 13, 2017, at 9:21 PM, Barry <w2up at comcast.net<mailto:w2up at comcast.net>> wrote:
>>
>> SO2R ops aren't using two freqs.  They are CQing on one and answering
> stations on another freq already in use by someone else.
>> Barry W2UP
>>
>>> On 3/13/2017 14:59, Martin Durham wrote:
>>> Not the issue. SO2R wouldn't be on a second frequency if it were not
> producing contacts.
>>> SO2R operators have twice the spectrum use of SO1R.
>>>
>>> THAT is the advantage. Why do multi ops exists?  To sit on a frequency
> calling CQ into dead air??
>>> I've been doing multi operator contests for over 30 years.
>>>
>>> Marty
>>> W1MD
>>>
>>> On Mar 13, 2017, at 4:55 PM, Ria Jairam
> <rjairam at gmail.com<mailto:rjairam at gmail.com><mailto:rjairam at gmail.com<mailto:rjairam at gmail.com>>> wrote:
>>>   Not necessarily since propagation varies widely within that space.
>>>
>>> Ria
>>> N2RJ
>>> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 4:46 PM Martin Durham
> <W1md at w1md.net<mailto:W1md at w1md.net><mailto:W1md at w1md.net<mailto:W1md at w1md.net>>> wrote:
>>> Hmmmmmm
>>>
>>> What if you look at the spectrum as 1.8 - 30mhz. One station cq'ing
>>> on two frequencies is using twice the spectrum.  Regardless of the
>>> 'band' you are on. Riiiight??  :)
>>>
>>> SO2R operators effectively get to use twice the spectrum that SO1R
> operators use...right?
>>> Marty
>>> W1MD
>>>
>>>> On Mar 13, 2017, at 4:40 PM, Ria Jairam
> <rjairam at gmail.com<mailto:rjairam at gmail.com><mailto:rjairam at gmail.com<mailto:rjairam at gmail.com>>> wrote:
>>>> Some bands are more limited in space than others.
>>>> 40m - 75kHz
>>>> 20m - 200kHz
>>>> 15m -  250kHz
>>>> 10m - 1.4MHz
>>>>
>>>> Some bands are more productive than others, depending on propagation.
>>>>
>>>> So with two CQs by one station on the same band the station engaging
>>>> in this practice takes up twice the space and denies others the use
>>>> of the productive or limited space band.
>>>>
>>>> CQing on two bands is different because the other band may not be as
>>>> productive, and even underused in low solar years.
>>>>
>>>> Ria
>>>> N2RJ
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 3:58 PM john at kk9a.com<mailto:john at kk9a.com><mailto:john at kk9a.com<mailto:john at kk9a.com>>
> <john at kk9a.com<mailto:john at kk9a.com><mailto:john at kk9a.com<mailto:john at kk9a.com>>> wrote:
>>>>> As far as spectrum usage goes what is the difference between this
>>>>> and a single op CQing on two bands?
>>>>>
>>>>> KK9A
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> To:     cq-contest at contesting.com<mailto:cq-contest at contesting.com><mailto:cq-contest at contesting.com<mailto:cq-contest at contesting.com>>
>>>>> Subject:        Re: [CQ-Contest] PJ4G ARRL DX SSB Recording by N2IC
>>>>> From:   W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu at w0mu.com<mailto:w0mu at w0mu.com><mailto:w0mu at w0mu.com<mailto:w0mu at w0mu.com>>>
>>>>> Date:   Mon, 13 Mar 2017 08:32:05 -0600
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Jeff,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the comments. I agree with your interpretation of the
>>>>> rules, I don't like that it is allowed and like many have asked the
>>>>> ARRL to close this loophole.
>>>>>
>>>>> Many believe that if everyone adopted this philosophy that the band
>>>>> would be a mess. People would have a very difficult time finding a
>>>>> place to CQ unless you were a big gun etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> 73 and thanks for all the contacts from everywhere!
>>>>>
>>>>> W0MU
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>>>>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com<mailto:CQ-Contest at contesting.com><mailto:CQ-Contest at contesting.com<mailto:CQ-Contest at contesting.com>>
>>>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>>>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com<mailto:CQ-Contest at contesting.com><mailto:CQ-Contest at contesting.com<mailto:CQ-Contest at contesting.com>>
>>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com<mailto:CQ-Contest at contesting.com>
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com<mailto:CQ-Contest at contesting.com>
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com<mailto:CQ-Contest at contesting.com>
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com<mailto:CQ-Contest at contesting.com>
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest