Randy Thompson, wrote
> I can't say for sure, but I suspect packet would allow me to add
> another 10%
> or more to my CQWW single op scores. Main reason is all the
> easy mults that
> I never find on my own because they are hiding high in the band
> or are on
> the band that I am running on.
>
Methink, it's like, why runners outrun runners on the crutches.
You might get 10% more mults, but lose 20% by wasting your time fighting the
never ending pileups or finding that spotted is not there, because he was
spotted by his club buddies and is running QRP or LP and no antenna.
Consistent results of assisted with packet crutches show less points then
unassisted.
If it was such an advantage, the picture would be reversed.
> Using packet would be another skill to master and I am sure the
> same guys at
> the top of single op would remain, packet or no. However, I
> agree with Dave
> that combining the two categories would make packet a required
> capability for success. That part kind of ruins it for me.
>
> Randy, K5ZD
>
I think the advantage of good operator and competitive station is in the
operating skill, knowing the bands and propagation and trying to work the stuff
before it shows up on packet and gets clobbered with never ending pileup.
Sooo, if it was all lumped into one category, would those who do not use packet
be cheating?
Keep it separate!
I still wonder what is the problem with someone claiming higher category then
what operated in, like running LP and submitting as HP, or running un-assisted
and submitting ass-isted? No rules are broken, but some "purists" have a
problem with that?
73 Yuri
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|