[RTTY] SO2R in WPX RTTY

Wed Feb 17 07:47:12 PST 2010

Hank,

Please don't get me wrong. You say:

'You preface your statements that "this is not a criticism" and
yet go ahead and couch your comments as such.'

That's nonsense. No preface from me; it was a plain criticism of the way a 
small minority of SO2R ops behave.

73,

John GW4SKA

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Hank Lonberg" <kr7x1 at verizon.net>
To: <rtty at contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 1:33 AM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] SO2R in WPX RTTY

>
> G3LDI/GW4SKA/GU0SUP/K4JIK et others:
>
> You preface your statements that "this is not a criticism" and
> yet go ahead and couch your comments as such.
>
> As one who does indeed operate SO2R I take this as a criticism
> of my chosen operating technique. I checked my log and none of
> you are in the 1800+ Q's I made in the test. Now maybe you
> exercised your right as an free man and tried to work me but
> were unable to make contact and moved on. That is your right
> and I don't criticize you for that.
>
> There are other reasons the stations you reference didn't,
> couldn't work you; you were not loud enough to break the pile
> up, the propagation was one way, or the station was looking
> for new multipliers and a new one was calling on the other
> frequency, there was tremendous QRM due to close packed
> stations (20 and 15 meters for example). This is not rude or
> indifferent behavior, the station was trying to maximize
> his/her score and was taking advantage of the opportunity as
> it presented itself.
>
> How does the SO2R have any more frequency than the SO1R, there
> can be only one signal at any time so the station doesn't
> occupy any more frequency on each band that is being worked as
> a SO1R on each particular band. As far as being inconsiderate,
> how is it inconsiderate if the station is trying to put in a
> serious effort, rate is king that is why SO2R is used, I
> believe it is called a contest with scoring and such. SO2R is
> an operating technique to maximize the number of possible Q's
> in a given time period.
>
> If a station's operating method causes you grief then move on
> and work someone else, it is that other station's loss. I know
> I sure would have like to work more 3 pt Gx  calls in the test
> and maybe you were one I missed because of my operating
> technique.
>
> I do not have to apologize to anyone for my choice of
> operating technique or desire to maximize my effort over the
> 30 hours I was on. I had fun, it was exciting and guess what,
> I had to go to work the next day so that is how important this
> all is, it is a hobby not life or death.
>
> Ciao and 73
>
> Hank / KR7X
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rtty-bounces at contesting.com
> [mailto:rtty-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Roger Cooke
> Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2010 1:29 PM
> To: rtty at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] SO2R in WPX RTTY
>
> OK, maybe two seconds is a bit impatient!  However, I don't
> think
> that we should support the run rate of an SO2R station by
> sitting looking
> out of the window waiting on his reply. There is another way
> of looking
> at this. Band occupancy is tight anyway, so why should SO2R
> have any
> more frequency than the poor Luddite SO1R?  I even saw someone
> say
> on here that he was going to use SO3R...  What????
>   I only have one brain with input from two ears. How the
> heck can
> anybody work SO3R?    Must be a joke....
>    Oh, and by the way, yes I do hit the wrong key sometimes
> and that
> puts me into a panic!
>
> 73 de Roger, G3LDI
>
>
> On 16/02/2010 20:52, k3mm at verizon.net wrote:
>> Well, I think you have to understand that usually in SO2R
> you can set up a rythym and it appears seamless.  However,
> when someone you are working gets long winded or you need a
> repeat it's easy to get messed up.  So when both QSO's break
> at exactly the same time, you have to make a choice which one
> gets the first call and the other has to wait.  The savvy SO2R
> op can minimize this pain a lot of times, but there is no way
> to eliminate it completely.  I think it's also likely that
> some of this is single TX stations that just "lost it" or got
> befuddled.  I've had them completely disappear mid-QSO and
> then come back 5 minutes later like nothing wierd happened.
>>
>> My general rule is if someone comes back slowly and is
> holding me up on the other radio, I make them wait for their
> confirmation rather than making the fast guy pay.
>>
>> However, if someone comes back to me and just gives me a
> "599nnn" with no callsign and no repeat, they will have to
> wait...and they may have to wait for me to say "agn agn "
> because I wont normally accept a number sent one time on a
> weak or crowded signal as correct.  So take 5 seconds to send
> a proper exchange sending the number at least twice...and
> please correct the callsign if it isnt correct!
>>
>> 73, Ty K3MM
>>
>>
>> Feb 16, 2010 03:16:51 PM, ska at bartg.org.uk wrote:
>>
>> Phil and all,
>>
>> It's about time someone said it.
>>
>> I have nothing against most of the SO2R operations and
> intend to run that
>> way myself in the future. It's just a few who are really
> inconsiderate and
>> are just thinking of their own run rate, while completely
> breaking the
>> rhythm of the other station.
>>
>> Several times my CQ was answered, I sent the report, then
> had to sit and
>> wait while the other station finished their other QSO.
>>
>> The same thing happens when you answer a CQ then wait a long
> time before
>> getting the report. Surely if someone sends 'CQ' they should
> be ready to get
>> that contact going right away. They are actually saying 'I
> am using this
>> frequency; please call me back and I will answer when I am
> ready'
>>
>> Thankfully it is only a minority and maybe they are just new
> to SO2R; it
>> must be hard to get up to speed when starting.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> John GW4SKA
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Phil Cooper"
>> To: "RTTY"
>>
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2010 7:41 PM
>> Subject: [RTTY] SO2R in WPX RTTY
>>
>>
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Just an observation, rather than any sort of criticism, but
> I note that
>>> quite a few SO2R op's were VERY slow in responding to calls
> and exchanges
>>> during this WPX. And by slow, I mean in the order of 10
> seconds or more!
>>>
>>> Whilst I am not necessarily in favour of SO2R (as part of
> the single op
>>> class), I understand why you want to do it, and good luck
> to you.
>>> BUT, I really think you should be a little quicker on the
> replies, and
>>> maybe
>>> consider those of us on the other end.
>>>
>>> Having said that, there were a few SO2R ops that were
> amazing, and
>>> responded
>>> very quickly, so it can be done.
>>>
>>> Obviously, if it is your run frequency, you have the
> control, but I don't
>>> particularly like waiting too long for that TU QRZ while
> you work a mult
>>> on
>>> another frequency.
>>> When I was CQ'ing, I had some callers that were obviously
> busy elsewhere,
>>> and it really did screw up MY run on occasions when I
> replied to you, but
>>> you were busy on your run frequency. One several occasions,
> I sent again,
>>> only to hear the end of your message to me. That meant
> other callers tried
>>> to get in, figuring I wasn't going to work you, so they
> called over you.
>>>
>>> Did anyone else notice the delay in responses?
>>>
>>> As I said, these thoughts are just an observation, and not
> a criticism!
>>>
>>> 73 de Phil GU0SUP
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
>>> Virus Database (VPS): 100216-1, 16/02/2010
>>> Tested on: 16/02/2010 19:41:43
>>> avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2010 ALWIL Software.
>>> http://www.avast.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> RTTY mailing list
>>> RTTY at contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> RTTY mailing list
>> RTTY at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>> _______________________________________________
>> RTTY mailing list
>> RTTY at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 9.0.733 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2692 - Release
> Date: 02/16/10 11:35:00
>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty 