[RTTY] SO2R...again/more..

[Tom Moore]

EFFECTIVE  SO2R was nothing but a dream until the WF1B,
WRITLOG and maybe a few other software programs came along.
 SO2R method was developed within the existing SO rules. But I
and many others cannot, for a minute, believe that SO2R operation
is within  the scope, meaning and intention of original SO rules which
were written, more often than not, years before effective SO2R was
ever believed to be a realistic possibility. In other words, SO2R
operation fell into a hole in the SO rules:  "There is nothing
specifically against it, so its ok". So, yes, it is perfectly legal. Nobody
is arguing that. But, as with many of our laws and rules of  society, "that
doesn't always make it right".

Some claim that adding a new category for SO2R (or SO1R) would
stiffle competition. I just don't see how SO2R competition amongst
SO2R participants would do this.. To the contrary, it seems to me it
would only serve to pump it up.  Meanwhile there's litterally hundreds
of contest participants who are clearly not in the SO2R competitive
league. Yet many would have them remain in the same competive
category saying, in effect, one must advance to SO2R in order
to ever be competive.  Therefore, I believe leaving SO2R in
competition with SO1R actually stiffels competition.

A contest is a contest with rules supposedly as fair and equal as
possible for the 'majority' of competitors.  Surely you must
agree that contest rules cannot address every possible variant
such as location, tower height, nr of antennas, size etc. If
they did, it would result in 10's of pages of complicated rules,
would drastically overburden log checkers; and yes even stifle
participation.  The normal result is usually  a set of rules that
reflect different goals:  area participation - some are clearly set up
favoring Europe, some NA etc.  Rules that solicit the type and
amount of participation. Many contest sponsors don't care about
power, some don't even care about  multi-op. Some address SWL's,
some don't. The point is they are all different in one way or another.

Ask yourself this question: How and why was the HP rule
implemented?  I submit that when the HP rule was written years
and years ago, it was done so with this in mind:  Assuming all
else is equal the use of an amplifier has proven to be a clear and
distinct advantage over those not using one. Hence the HP
rule was born. And I don't see any evidence of  it ever stiffling
competition.

The same reasoning can and is easily applied to the SO2R issue:
Assuming all else is equal, the use of more than one radio has
proven be to a clear and distinct advantage over those using
one radio.   Even many of the top SO2R ops have admitted that
SO2R is a clear and distinct advantage.

What I'm saying here is this: If Don AA5AU was able to
double himself, with one of him operating as SO2R and the
other SO1R, the SO2R Don would win. No if's and's or butt's
about it.  The fact is that SO2R has a clear and distinct
advantage that SO1R can not compete with. Even Don has
publicly stated as much.  Yes, many will run SO2R and be
outscored by a SO1R station just like it happens with HP/LP.
The bottom line is:  ALL ELSE BEING EQUAL (like with HP),
SO2R IS A CLEAR AND DISTINCT ADVANTAGE OVER
SO1R!

Yes, for these reasons,  I and many others believe the rules are
unfair because they were written xx years ago and do not address
advances in computer technology as they are used in today's
contests especially where they so significantly impact score
differences.  There's no way that they could have foreseen these
advances and written fair rules to fit.

So if I'm right, why haven't contest sponsors already changed
their rules? And the answer is simple. Humans are resistant to
change. Don't rock the boat. Its too much work. Its this, its that,
and on and on. POLITICS.  Just like getting anything else
changed in our sociiety, it darn near takes an act of congress.

One last point. There's been alot of comments on this reflector
both pro and con. The problem is that many have resulted to
name calling, demeaning and sarcastic remarks, etc. There's
no need for this. Everyone is of course entitled to their opinion.
But lets please try to keep it as civil as possible. Think through
your reasoning and try to leave the emotion out.  We should
be able to disagree without battering, slandering, and beating
each other up.

Note: The use of capitals, above, are not meant to be 'yelling'
but only to serve as emphasis/importance on the word or
phrase.

73, Tom WX4TM ex KL7Q