CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

[CQ-Contest] why declaring SO2R is almost worthless

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: [CQ-Contest] why declaring SO2R is almost worthless
From: kr2q@optonline.net
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 16:08:35 +0000 (GMT)
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
The trouble with the SO2R "check-box" (and even more so with the category,
if there were one), is that it doesn't tell you enough information so that one
might "compare" efforts.

Just how many 2nd radio QSO's were made?  How many were mults?  Did the 
overall rate slow down, not change, or did it speed up?  

I think it would be "hard" for someone trying out SO2R and making under, say 10
second radio Q's to feel that they were "really" SO2R and hence might not 
declare
SO2R.  Where is the cutoff?  Does need to make 100 2nd radio QSO's for the 
entrant
to feel confident enough to declare SO2R?

On the "viewer" side (the "other" guy), you have no idea just how important the 
2nd
radio was to the final score....just that "he used a 2nd radio."

With CQWW open logs, those really interested can attempt to sort out which Q's 
were
made on the 2nd radio.  How many of you will actually do that?

It's sort of like saying "I have a south antenna."  Just how many extra Q's did 
you put
into the log because of that South antenna if you are SO1R?  Just how "more" 
than
if you had to turn the antenna?  

All of this is FUN, but unless you can quantify things, it is way too vague.

de Doug KR2Q
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [CQ-Contest] why declaring SO2R is almost worthless, kr2q <=