CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R

To: dezrat@copper.net
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R
From: sawyered@earthlink.net
Reply-to: sawyered@earthlink.net
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2006 01:19:45 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Nothing will get you off that, Bill.

How about the big vs. little antenna system, hard line vs. crappy coax, number 
of miles from the Atlantic in DX contests, number of miles from the Northeast 
in Domestic contests (not sure what the best number for that is, but it sure 
isn't 0), good rigs with filters vs. tube rigs, etc, etc.

Ed  N1UR

-----Original Message-----
>From: Bill Turner <dezrat@copper.net>
>Sent: Jul 29, 2006 10:01 PM
>To: sawyered@earthlink.net
>Cc: cq-contest@contesting.com
>Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R
>
>ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
>On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 18:17:35 -0400 (GMT-04:00), you wrote:
>
>
>>So please, can we get off of the SO1R vs SO2R thing....
>
>------------ REPLY SEPARATOR ------------
>
>Shall we also get off the HP/LP thing? The SO/MO thing? The
>assisted/unassisted thing?
>
>Those operations were separated into their own classes because each
>one had a *significant* advantage/disadvantage over the other.
>
>One radio/two radio has a similar significant difference and should be
>treated the same.
>
>Bill, W6WRT

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

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>