The pileup tapes were for fun only, and didn't
count toward the final score.
As SSB/CW goes, here's my experiences as OJ3R.
For us, QSOs counted the same for CW and SSB.
Europe was worth 1 QSO point, DX 2 points. On the
high bands, SSB rates generally were better, because
you could simply work them faster on phone. However,
most of these were Europe. We were able to work far
more DX (W's) using CW, and thus our QSO Point per
hour was actually higher using that mode when the
bands were open stateside. Also, we worked several
close in backscatter mults we never would have had the
chance to work using SSB.
On 40 and 80, trying to find a hole in the narrow
phone subband with our 100w was nearly impossible
amungst the loud HQ and other EU stations. On the
other hand, we were able to hold our own using CW and
get quite good rates. We only used SSB here to work
new multipliers.
After talking with the top 3 teams, I think they
generally followed the same strategy - they just did
it better than us.
I think that a SSB only team with weak CW skills
would be at a SERIOUS disadvantage at a WRTC with
similar scoring.
73, Dave N2NL
--- Chris Blakely <chris.blakely@verizon.net> wrote:
> 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
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes
http://autos.yahoo.com
|