Mike,Rich,
"The real answer is probably something like it doesn't matter because
> no one would send a ssb only team anyway and the strategy at this
> level of competition is simply run best rate for score. Having to balance
> between CW and SSB is a nuisance and not necessary,"
I may be wrong but is there not a CW pileup competition that figures as
part of the final score? There is an spreadsheet on the WRTC web site that
shows K5TJ & K1TO as being the highest scorers in the pileup competition. I
think that in the last WRTC this score was also part of the final standings,
so that a strictly ssb would suffer badly.
Chris, AB1R
----- Original Message -----
From: "KL7RA" <kl7ra@blizzard.gcgo.nasa.gov>
To: "[Contest Reflector]" <cq-contest@contesting.com>; "Mike Gilmer, N2MG"
<n2mg@eham.net>
Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2002 4:29 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Ideas for WRTC 2004
> >Considering that the OJs ran 100W to a rather low tribander, I have to
> >believe that it was difficult for a "SSB" team to compete. ///snip
>
> >-Mike N2MG
>
> You're probably right Mike, but during the last few hours of the test
> their SSB rates were around five a minute, 300 hour, or more and
> I was having some difficulty cracking their ssb piles. The usual
> thinking is to double the points for CW and the Finns decided not
> to do this.
>
> My thinking is a super ssb op would have some advantage over the
> CW op simply because he could go faster, there are more ssb stations
> on and more mults. When the rate falls due 100 watts/ low antenna, you
> change bands.
>
> The real answer is probably something like it doesn't matter because
> no one would send a ssb only team anyway and the strategy at this
> level of competition is simply run best rate for score. Having to balance
> between CW and SSB is a nuisance and not necessary,
>
> Rich KL7RA
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>From Sean D. Fleming" <k8khz@comcast.net Thu Jul 18 01:31:51 2002
From: Sean D. Fleming" <k8khz@comcast.net (Sean D. Fleming)
Subject: [CQ-Contest] SSB Vs. CW QSO's in a Contest
Message-ID: <000e01c22df2$82ce7820$f1992944@Fleming.madsnh01.mi.comcast.net>
I am not the greatest CW copier at all. I even have to use CWget to copy cy at
speeds sent by contesting stations. But I look at like the subbmision of CW op
K9LA with like 3,100 CW QSo's made in 24 Hours. Then I wonder well can you make
SSB contacts faster than CW contacts and what is it I am lacking to make more
SSB contacts. Is it Filters? Is it Large Antennas? Is it just the lack of
fastness of talking. Put some input in. I need some elmering so that I can win
a contest at some time.
My Shack here is Wire and 100W with a TS-570D(G) But I have been to a station
with a 2el Quad and a 756 Pro. Results are still somewhat not the best yet.
Also Interested to know what do you use to send CW and copy it head or
computer. Tnx.
73's
Sean
K8KHZ
k8khz@yahoo.com
http://www.geocities.com/k8khz
--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
---
|