[RTTY] [CQ-Contest] SO2R-SO1R from The Yukon??

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

Bill, 

After being completely told you were off base on CQ-Contest and 
that the majority of REAL contesters had no problem with SO2R 
and no justification for a separate category based on SKILL, I 
find it amazing that you retreat to RTTY to continue to stir 
this pot.  

Not only that, you have the gall to misstate the facts. 

> There are already two hardware-based categories: HP/LP/QRP and
> assisted. They were created for good reason and it is time for SO1R
> and SO2R to be separated too.

Assisted is not a hardware based distinction - it is a category 
in which the operator does not perform all functions but accepts 
spotting assistance.  There is a clear difference between Single 
Operator and Single Operator Assisted.  If you can't see that, 
you have absolutely no credibility. 

Of course, SO1R/SO2R is not a hardware based category anyway.  As 
dozens of others on CQ-Contest have attested time and time again, 
SO1R/SO2R is a skill that is developed with practice.  Putting a 
second transceiver in a shack will not automatically improve the 
score if it is not used properly (with skill).  

Simply put, if your goal is to take away the "advantage" the SO2R 
operator's skill provides, convince the contest sponsors to add a
"10 minute rule" or limit the number of band changes in a clock 
hour.  If your goal is to "level the playing field" start with 
antenna limitations or antenna categories.  If that is not your 
goal, be honest enough to admit that you are just out to get rid 
of those operators with more skill that you so you don't have to 
compete with them.  

> I am not concerned about antenna categories and neither is anyone 
> but W4TV as far as I can tell. Nobody but W4TV brings up the antenna 
> issue and then only as an attempted diversion from the one vs two 
> radio issue.

Antenna based categories have as much - or more - justification in 
leveling the playing field or segregating competitors into groups 
of "their own kind" than your fanatical jihad against SO2R.  If your 
attitude to acquired skill were applied to Major League Baseball, the 
curve ball and knuckle ball (single pitcher, three (or four) pitches) 
and might even be banned. 



> -----Original Message-----
> From: rtty-bounces at contesting.com 
> [mailto:rtty-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bill Turner
> Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 10:59 AM
> To: rtty at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] [CQ-Contest] SO2R-SO1R from The Yukon??
> 
> 
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
> 
> On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 17:08:40 -0500, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
> <w4tv at subich.com> wrote:
> 
> >
> >When you convince all contest sponsors to create a separate entry 
> >category for those who use low, non-gain antennas whether by choice, 
> >zoning restrictions, HOA regulation or simply lack of space, you 
> >will have the moral standing to argue for separate entry categories 
> >for other hardware limitations.
> 
> ------------ REPLY FOLLOWS ------------
> 
> I am not concerned about antenna categories and neither is anyone but
> W4TV as far as I can tell. Nobody but W4TV brings up the antenna issue
> and then only as an attempted diversion from the one vs two radio
> issue. If anyone wants antenna categories, by all means bring it up.
> 
> There are already two hardware-based categories: HP/LP/QRP and
> assisted. They were created for good reason and it is time for SO1R
> and SO2R to be separated too.
> 
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
> 
>