N0DH wrote:
>>or is QST in error with it's
>>latest publishing of the rules???
What????? QST make an error? No way!
:-) <---- Thing
Paul WX9E
>From barry@w2up.wells.com (Barry Kutner) Fri Jul 7 23:55:09 1995
From: barry@w2up.wells.com (Barry Kutner) (Barry Kutner)
Subject: WAE and PACKET
Message-ID: <mq3V8c1w165w@w2up.wells.com>
george fremin iii <geoiii@bga.com> writes:
> Barry Kutner writes:
>
> : 1. Nobody has ever proven packet is an advantage. As a matter of fact,
> : the Top Ten SO scores are usually higher than the SOA scores.
>
> Have you really looked at the scores? I have - your statment is
> just not true. The "serious" SOA guy has more mults and if he
> does the contest correctly he has as many qsos. The SOA stations
> have more mults/per qso. The fact that usually the compitition is
> lower in the SOA catagory is just a showing of lack of intrest
> of the serious single ops? (maybe)
>
Didn't know you were going to make my personal reply public (no big
deal), and play point-counterpoint. So here goes... Jane you ignorant
slut....
I stand by my statement about SO vs SOA scores. As a matter of fact, K3WW
presented this data at Dayton 2 (?) years ago. The comment that an SOA op
has more mults is absolutely true. BUT how does one get as many QSOs? It
takes a lot of time to bust thru those packet pileups unless you are a
LPL/RM/RS type station. When I operate SOA, I try to ignore packet for
the first 24 hours, unless it's a mult I don't think will be obtainable
Sunday.
> : 2. I've heard lots of stories about SO's monitoring packet anyway, so
> : this eleminates one possible form of cheating.
>
> This is like saying that everyone in the qrp or 100 watt classes
> run 1500 watts. So why have them? Or why even have single op?
>
You're 59300 from I3xxx. 'nuf said...
> : 3. It is just another part of the progression of technology. Should we
> : have a computer logging vs. hand logging catagory? memory keyer vs bug?
> : etc.
>
> Now - this is true - but you over look one very important fact -
> how about the guy that does not have a packet cluster to connect to?
> I have been operating at a station for the last 2 years where until
> very recently - we had almost no packet access - why should someone
> like that be forced to play at a disadvantage? Packet clusters
> are *not* universal - nor are they of the same quality everywhere.
>
> In fact there are clusters where you have 5-12 users who are
> almost all ssb dxers - dont help much in a cw contest.
>
>
You are correct that CLusters are not the same quality everywhere, but
neither is propagation, antenna farms, etc. Nothing is ever equal, nor
will it ever be. But maybe it will create incentive to upgrade your
Cluster and/or local operators.
> : 4. I think it is more of a sham when a hired gun has the station owner
> : cooking, performing minor (or major) maintenance, etc.
>
> Well - this I have never bought - I operate at W5KFT - I stacked
> all the tower, I do almost all the maintaince, he lives 350 miles away -
> I operate the contests alone. The driveway it 2 miles long - usually
> with only cows to talk to on my off times.
>
I don't want to name names, but there are many stations where this is not
true. I recall a comment in a contest soapbox a few years ago that
prompted a letter in NCJ by W3BGN about what is pushing the limit of
single op.
>
> : 5. IMO, it adds to the comraderie of contesting, and makes the contest
> : more interesting.
>
> This might be true - but is not a good reason to *force* folks to
> use packet.
>
Nobody is *forced* to do anything. I still go back to point 1 and submit
there is no proof packet adds any advantage, and MAY even be to one's
disadvantage when comparing SO to SOA.
73
--
Barry N. Kutner, W2UP Internet: barry@w2up.wells.com
Newtown, PA Packet Radio: W2UP @ WB3JOE.#EPA.PA.USA.NA
Packet Cluster: W2UP >WB2R (FRC)
.......................................................................
>From n3rr@cais.cais.com (Bill Hider) Sat Jul 8 01:56:13 1995
From: n3rr@cais.cais.com (Bill Hider) (Bill Hider)
Subject: WAE and PACKET
Message-ID: <199507080056.UAA14016@cais.cais.com>
I thought everyone understood that SOA is a unique mode and cannot be
compared to any other mode of operation.
Consider this: If your station were equivalent to K3ZO's, maybe you
wouldn't even consider SOA. K3ZO doesn't, he likes SO.
SOA can help the station that isn't in the ZO,LPL,RM class. Indeed, the
'lil gun can increase his/her score by using packet. If they operated SO,
they wouldn't have a chance.
So, SOA is improving scores, it's just that the observer isn't looking at
what scores are being improved.
Did anyone say that the goal of SOA is to have scores better than SO scores.
Not at all.
Again, SOA is a mode of operation, not a panacea. I love the mode. My
station is
designed around it. Prior to this year, I used a A4-S @ 55 Feet for 10
years and did quite well in SOA. Did I beat K3ZO, no. Did I try? No. Did I
have fun? YES!!
That's all there is to it. SOA's will continue to compete with others in
their class. SOA is a mode, and you must play to win!
73...Bill
n3rr@cais.com
t 10:55 PM 7/7/95 GMT, Barry Kutner wrote:
>george fremin iii <geoiii@bga.com> writes:
>
>> Barry Kutner writes:
>>
>> : 1. Nobody has ever proven packet is an advantage. As a matter of fact,
>> : the Top Ten SO scores are usually higher than the SOA scores.
>>
>> Have you really looked at the scores? I have - your statment is
>> just not true. The "serious" SOA guy has more mults and if he
>> does the contest correctly he has as many qsos. The SOA stations
>> have more mults/per qso. The fact that usually the compitition is
>> lower in the SOA catagory is just a showing of lack of intrest
>> of the serious single ops? (maybe)
>>
>Didn't know you were going to make my personal reply public (no big
>deal), and play point-counterpoint. So here goes... Jane you ignorant
>slut....
>I stand by my statement about SO vs SOA scores. As a matter of fact, K3WW
>presented this data at Dayton 2 (?) years ago. The comment that an SOA op
>has more mults is absolutely true. BUT how does one get as many QSOs? It
>takes a lot of time to bust thru those packet pileups unless you are a
>LPL/RM/RS type station. When I operate SOA, I try to ignore packet for
>the first 24 hours, unless it's a mult I don't think will be obtainable
>Sunday.
>
>> : 2. I've heard lots of stories about SO's monitoring packet anyway, so
>> : this eleminates one possible form of cheating.
>>
>> This is like saying that everyone in the qrp or 100 watt classes
>> run 1500 watts. So why have them? Or why even have single op?
>>
>You're 59300 from I3xxx. 'nuf said...
>
>> : 3. It is just another part of the progression of technology. Should we
>> : have a computer logging vs. hand logging catagory? memory keyer vs bug?
>> : etc.
>>
>> Now - this is true - but you over look one very important fact -
>> how about the guy that does not have a packet cluster to connect to?
>> I have been operating at a station for the last 2 years where until
>> very recently - we had almost no packet access - why should someone
>> like that be forced to play at a disadvantage? Packet clusters
>> are *not* universal - nor are they of the same quality everywhere.
>>
>> In fact there are clusters where you have 5-12 users who are
>> almost all ssb dxers - dont help much in a cw contest.
>>
>>
>You are correct that CLusters are not the same quality everywhere, but
>neither is propagation, antenna farms, etc. Nothing is ever equal, nor
>will it ever be. But maybe it will create incentive to upgrade your
>Cluster and/or local operators.
>
>> : 4. I think it is more of a sham when a hired gun has the station owner
>> : cooking, performing minor (or major) maintenance, etc.
>>
>> Well - this I have never bought - I operate at W5KFT - I stacked
>> all the tower, I do almost all the maintaince, he lives 350 miles away -
>> I operate the contests alone. The driveway it 2 miles long - usually
>> with only cows to talk to on my off times.
>>
>I don't want to name names, but there are many stations where this is not
>true. I recall a comment in a contest soapbox a few years ago that
>prompted a letter in NCJ by W3BGN about what is pushing the limit of
>single op.
>
>>
>> : 5. IMO, it adds to the comraderie of contesting, and makes the contest
>> : more interesting.
>>
>> This might be true - but is not a good reason to *force* folks to
>> use packet.
>>
>
>Nobody is *forced* to do anything. I still go back to point 1 and submit
>there is no proof packet adds any advantage, and MAY even be to one's
>disadvantage when comparing SO to SOA.
>73
>
>--
>=======================================================================
>Barry N. Kutner, W2UP Internet: barry@w2up.wells.com
>Newtown, PA Packet Radio: W2UP @ WB3JOE.#EPA.PA.USA.NA
> Packet Cluster: W2UP >WB2R (FRC)
>.......................................................................
>
>
|