[RTTY] Not to beat the ANTENNA OVERKILL horse...

[Carter, K8VT]

Bill Turner wrote:

>  No need for the insults, Barry.

>  We are not whiners and we are fully grown up, and yes, we know life
>  isn't always fair. However, that doesn't mean that unfairness should
>  be encouraged or rewarded.

>  No one is asking for a guaranteed win, only for competition on an
>  equal basis, as much as possible. Of course stations will never be
>  exactly equal and we realize that, but in the past new categories
>  have been created when it became apparent that some kinds of
>  operation had significant advantages: HP vs LP, MO vs SO, assisted vs
>  unassisted. We feel the same applies to SO1R vs SO2R and the time
>  has come to recognize the fact.

>  Don, AA5AU, has been quoted as saying SO2R has a score advantage of
>  about 40% or so. Don't you think that is significant? I do.

Bill,

Thanks for the very well written response above.

First, fellow hams don't deserve insults and sarcasm for stating their 
opinions.

Next, I do think AA5AU's quote of 40% advantage *is* significant.

Also, it's my opinion that those that talk about antennas and beams are 
truly missing the point; yes, some can cheat and use a big/temporary 
antenna, but they could also cheat by using their amp and saying they 
are in the LP category or cheat 50 other ways That's really *not* the 
issue. The issue *is* that the 40% advantage of SO2R should merit its 
own category.

Finally, I think your original proposal quoted below is a GREAT idea and 
hope some contest sponsors give it serious consideration.

>  1. Limited class: One radio, no spotting, moderate antennas, i.e. the
>  Old Way.

>  2. Unlimited class: Anything legal goes.

>  Those classes define hardware only. Within them you could have single
>  or multi op and high or low power. [and needless to say, SO2R]

73,
Carter K8VT