Mike Coslo wrote:
wrote:
Bill Turner wrote:

On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 22:53:51 GMT, "K=D8HB"
wrote:
Let's go beyond the SO1R/SO2R question and look
at the bigger picture.


OK

I think it's time to revise the basic structure of
contest competition.
Contesting hardware has evolved to the point that one must
spend a small
fortune to be competitive, and I think that is hurting
contesting itself.


That depends on what you mean by "competitive" and "a small fortune".

I don't agree with the basic premise, Jim. The operator
is a lot more
important than the equipment.

To a point, yes. But the guy with 100 W and a dipole at 40 feet isn't
going to win CQWW or even SS no matter how good he is. He's not even
going to make Top Ten.

That doesn't mean he can't do well, just that winning is a different
game.

For some hams, "competitive" means winning outright, or at
least making the Top Ten. For others, "competitive" means
winning their section, or maybe division, or maybe getting
into the top ten of same.

And for others it's simply doing better than last year.

And if they keep it up, they will eventually become the top
dogs.

But there comes a point where doing better becomes equipment
limited.

In similar fashion, cost is relative. A $5000 station is small
change to some and beyond others' wildest dreams. Same for
many other spending levels.

Just a few years back, having a dedicated computer in the
shack was a major expense. Not any more!


I believe there are two general groups of contesters:

1. People who like the head-to-head competition on a
personal level and
are not motivated by having large amounts of expensive
hardware. These
people focus on operating skill, knowledge and strategy instead of eq=
uipment.

-and-

2. People who will do anything legal to maximize their score,
including
spending huge amounts of money on rigs, antennas and any other hardwa=
re which gives them an advantage.


I disagree strongly!

I think there are many more basic groups, from the casual types
just putting in a few hours and maybe picking up a new state
or country, to the all-out multi-multis, to the middle-of-the-
pack folks, to the special-interest ones (like the QRP types
with incredible antenna farms).

On top of this is the fact that the superstations require
operating skill, knowledge and strategy just like the 100 W
and dipole folks.


Both groups have good points and neither is superior to the
other.


Agreed!

In fact the superstations need the little guys in order to make super
scores. And the little guys need the superstations.


What
is wrong with contesting today is both groups are combined into one w=
hen
it comes to competing, and that is hurting contesting.


Well, there's division by power level, by multiop vs. single, and
packet spotting.

I propose that there be two basic classes of competition:

1. A Limited Class which clearly spells out maximum hardware,
i.e. one
radio, one antenna per band, no receiving while transmitting,
and perhaps some others,

-and-

2. An Unlimited Class which allows anything legal.

Within those two classes there could be subclasses for power
level and
number of operators, but the basic hardware definitions would
remain the
same. This would allow an operator to choose his class and know he is
competing against others who are equipped similarly.


The trouble is where the lines are drawn.

What does "one radio" mean? Is a second receiver allowed? How
about if the second receiver is built into the rig?

One antenna per band could work a hardship on even some modest
stations. At my previous location I had an inverted V for 80/40
that could be made to work on 20. Also had a 20 meter vertical
with elevated radials. 100 W homebrew transceiver. Hardly a
superstation but I did pretty well.

On 20 the vertical was usually better, but sometimes the
inverted
V would do the trick. "One antenna per band" would eliminate
that.

The whole concept is way way way to complicated. Also
unenforceable.
Will the contest committee send out Hamcops to ensure
compliance?

Who enforces the present rules? Power level, packet spotting, etc.?

The present hardware situation reminds me of a boxer who has
acquired a
set of brass knuckles but who still wants to fight those not so
equipped. That's not right and neither is contesting in its
present form.


I don't see it that way at all. I think we need an "iron" class for a
very different reason.

One thing that makes a contest fun (for me) is the competition.
It's radiosport, pure and simple. I think the message that needs
to be emphasized more is that you don't need a superstation to
have a good time.

No you don't.

But it takes more than the average station to win.

I know too many hams with "100W and dipole" stations who think
contesting with such a setup isn't practical.

100 watts and a dipole is only about 90 percent of contesters!

And they don't win.

And compared to
the results of superstations, they're right. But if they could
see how they did against similar setups, we might get more of
them - which is a good thing all around.

My experience is that contests have two different aspects.
Operator
skill and power. This is assuming that the operator has a receiver of
adequate performance. If you have to get rid of one parameter, go with
operator skill.


"Power" is actually signal strength. I'd rather have really good
antennas and QRP than high power and poor antennas.

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote

But it takes more than the average station to win.

Winning isn't about being average.

Average sailors in average boats don't win the Americas Cup. Average golfers
with average clubs don't win the Masters. Average drivers in average cars don't
win Indy. Average jockeys on average horses don't win the Belmont. Average
radiomen with average stations don't win CQWWDX.

Life isn't set up to give plaques to "average joes". Winners are above average.
Second place is "First Loser".

73, de Hans, K0HB

K=D8HB wrote:
"Bill Turner" wrote

Contesting hardware has evolved to the point that one must
spend a small fortune to be competitive..........

I don't think money is what makes you competitive.

It's an important factor, though. Always has been. Part of the
game in most contests.

Innovation and thoughtful
design of your station, honing your skills, and picking the
fights you can win are what make a station competitive.

"picking the fights you can win" means "have realisitic expectations".

I'll use my station as a prime example.

This'll be good...

In the major contests in which I
compete I have an excellent record of success with lots of
section and division
wallpaper and walnut on the wall. Any time I get whupped it's due to =
better operators, not the cost of the station.

My SO2R setup consists of a 10-year-old Icom run rig and a 17-
year-old mult rig.

And they are?

The city-lot antenna farm consists of a single tower with a
tribander,

Which is more than many hams will ever have.

And that description covers a lot of ground. "city-lot" could mean an
acre. "Single tower" could be 70 feet or more.
"Tribander" could be anything from a TA-33 to a Force 12 or whatever.

Big differences under that umbrella.

a selection of wire antennas, and a couple of verticals.

I'll take a dipole at 90 feet over a TA-33 at 40 feet...

Station control is an
8-year-old 'consumer grade 486', CT by K1EA (freeware), and
homebrewed
SO2R-relay/wiring system. "Hamfest value" of the entire
station is well below the "small fortune" level.

"Fortune" is in the wallet of the spender. For some folks, a $2000
station is a small fortune. For others, a $2000 transceiver
is "not competitive".

What's the replacement value of the tower and everything on it?
Not hamfest value - replacement value.

And then there's the price of the real estate to put it all on....

You only need a "small fortune" if you're adverse to a
little "sweat equity" and decide to buy it all at
1-800-rigs-r-us.

Agreed! In fact, one of the great levelers is the relatively low
price and high quality of used gear. Say, a good clean TT Omni VI+
with all the filters and mods. Close to $3000 back when it was new -
half that today? Less than half?

The computer that was $2000 less than a decade ago can be rescued from
doorstop status and put to work in the shack. Sure, it won't run
Windoze very well, but Windoze 9x isn't a good choice for contesting
anyway.

In fact, if you depend on "rigs-r-us" to win I'd guess your
station probably
could benefit from some thoughtful design efforts, not more
money.

There's also the big unknown of real estate. Take SS - the ham in a
rare section has a built-in advantage over the ham in a nonrare one.
The middle part of the country has an advanatage over the coasts. The
ham who can live on a big "city lot" with no restrictions has an
advantage over the one who has less room.
Etc. But that's all part of the game.=20

73 de Jim, N2EY

K=D8HB wrote:
wrote

But it takes more than the average station to win.

Winning isn't about being average.

Agreed!

Average sailors in average boats don't win the Americas Cup.
Average golfers
with average clubs don't win the Masters. Average drivers in
average cars don't
win Indy. Average jockeys on average horses don't win the
Belmont. Average
radiomen with average stations don't win CQWWDX.

But the radiosportsmen take over big parts of the popular HF ham bands
when a contest is on. Which is more than a few weekends a year. There's
no real equivalent to that in the other contests.

And unlike the other contests, getting more radiosport contestants
helps, not hurts, the winners.

Life isn't set up to give plaques to "average joes". Winners
are above average.
Second place is "First Loser".

"Winner" has all sorts of definitions. Winning your section is
one level, winning your division another, etc. Just setting
a personal best score is winning.

Most radiosport contests have several levels of competition.
That's a good thing. My "Iron" class proposal doesn't reduce
or eliminate anyone's win.

73 de Jim, N2EY

K=D8HB wrote:
"Dave" wrote


Actually the LP layer (100-150W) is where the greatest number of stations
specifically engineered for SO2R seems to be.

I wouldn't bet on that, getting a good SO2R station running represents
a lot of work and expense. Adding an amp is a no-brainer in comparison
on both counts. The purpose of a 2R lashup is to have a run rig and a
mult rig instantly available. Since it's difficult to keep those
200-300/hr runs going with a 100W signal all the SO2R ops I know around
here use amps. Analyzing the published scores should answer the
question.

Surprising on the surface, but
makes a lot of sense when you consider the issue of self-induced noise.

Ya got me: What's "self-induced noise"?=20

=20
73, de Hans, K0HB

w3rv

Dave Heil wrote:
K=D8HB wrote:
wrote


I'm aware of stations who use packet spots during contests and who claim
SO status. There's no real way to put that genie back into the bottle.

Actually the contest sponsers have gotten pretty good at detecting
those bad boys. They've developed software which automatically combs
thru logs and looks for patterns which indicate who did what when spots
show up. Lotta those guys scores have been tossed.

That's a logical extension of SO2R, and I believe that the station desi=
gner who
makes it work ought to remain in SO category and not be "punished" for =
his
innovation and design effort.

I disagree. The robot is, in effect, a second op.

I also disagree because when you get right down to it it's functionally
the same as using the spots. If it worked well enough though it would
probably be better than the spots because it would be "operating" under
the same propagation/reception condx as the rest of the station.

You can waste a lotta time chasing spots even if they are posted by
locals. Sure, the guy three Zip codes over with his 3EL 40M beam @ 150
feet can easily pick off that JT. But I'm sitting here with my weenie
dipole @ 40 feet and I can't hear a peep from the JT. In the meanwhile
I've wasted two minutes on a spots-induced wild goose chase.

Similar things already exist. CT and NA both have a feature called "Su=
per Check
Partial" which provide "matches" from a database of calls harvested from
previous contests. For example, if you enter the partial call "K0H", i=
t will
show you several choices of calls like K0HA, K0HB, SK0HL, IK0HBN, all o=
f which
contain the sequence "K0H". Because that's information not gathered "of=
f the air
during the contest", purists consider it "outside assistance" and feel =
it should
disqualify the entrant from SO and place them in an assisted category.

If I'm not mistaken those files can be used with all the mainstream
loggers these days.

I don't even have the files in CT and I'm with the purists on this one.

Purists draw only this line between SO and "multi-op" or "assisted". E=
very bit
of information which goes into an SO log must be gathered off the air d=
uring the
contest period by a single operator and his equipment without outside a=
ssitance
such as packet clusters, harvested data-bases, and similar aids.

I'm with K3ZO on the SO2R scene: It is a lot of extra work and trouble

It's certainly a lot of extra work and trouble I wouldn't even think
about getting into. But I'm not "everybody", involves the mindsets of
the specific ops. The hardcore types could care less, to them it's just
one more hill to climb to get even-up with their competitors. In many
cases they actually *enjoy* all the complexity & work. Money be damned.


and I'm of the opinion that a good SO can usually equal or beat the 2R op.

Published scores trump opinions David.

I don't think automation has necessarily been a good thing for
contesting. Computer logging aside, it has removed a good bit of the
"fun factor" in contesting.

Depends on where the op gets his jollies. One of the local EEs doesn't
do much operating but he's the guru of gurus nationally when it comes
to designing/building wonderous 2R and M-M black boxes and running the
Spider spots network. Different strokes for different folks top to
bottom in contesting.

I've never even used the keyboard or
computer for sending during a contest and don't do much with a memory
keyer. I'm beginning to think that Father Time and automation have
combined to reduce my interest in going for score in most contests.

You have a *huge* amount of company on this one. My iron-bottom days
are *long* gone. Geez, dunno how many times I did 40-48 hours at some
multi-multi or another back when. Back when I was 30-40 something of
course. These days my critical piece of "automation" is my alarm
clock.groan.

I
find that my interest in single band efforts is increased, mostly
because it allows me to get some sleep.

Less hassles all 'round. I have antenna installation restrictions and
electrical noise here but I'm hoping to squeeze a 20M antenna up and go
100W S&P mode simply to keep the my dust & rust level down.

Dave K8MN

w3rv

wrote:
K=D8HB wrote:

"Winner" has all sorts of definitions. Winning your section is
one level, winning your division another, etc. Just setting
a personal best score is winning.

Winning is beating the Yankee Clippers. Try operating at that "level"
for the ultimate contesting experience.=20

73 de Jim, N2EY

w3rv

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...



My experience is that contests have two different aspects. Operator skill
and power. This is assuming that the operator has a receiver of adequate
performance. If you have to get rid of one parameter, go with operator
skill.

- Mike KB3EIA -

I agree partly......

1. Operator skill

2. Receiver

3. Antenna

4. Power

Note; 2 and 3 can be interchanged.

Dan/W4NTI

wrote in message
oups.com...
KØHB wrote:
wrote

But it takes more than the average station to win.

Winning isn't about being average.

Agreed!

Average sailors in average boats don't win the Americas Cup.
Average golfers
with average clubs don't win the Masters. Average drivers in
average cars don't
win Indy. Average jockeys on average horses don't win the
Belmont. Average
radiomen with average stations don't win CQWWDX.

But the radiosportsmen take over big parts of the popular HF ham bands
when a contest is on. Which is more than a few weekends a year. There's
no real equivalent to that in the other contests.

And unlike the other contests, getting more radiosport contestants
helps, not hurts, the winners.

Life isn't set up to give plaques to "average joes". Winners
are above average.
Second place is "First Loser".

"Winner" has all sorts of definitions. Winning your section is
one level, winning your division another, etc. Just setting
a personal best score is winning.

Most radiosport contests have several levels of competition.
That's a good thing. My "Iron" class proposal doesn't reduce
or eliminate anyone's win.

73 de Jim, N2EY


In the for what its worth department;

I, W4NTI have been contesting seriously since about 1973 when I participated
in a major operation from DL5AY. (Army MARS station in Frankfurt). It was
the CQWWDX Phone and we had a blast. We had Americans, Germans, wives,
sons, daughters, company and Battalion commanders there. And great German
sausage and Beer. A fun time was had by all. We also made over 2.5 million
points. What a blast....

That is some of what contesting is to me. Soon I intend to go play with
some super stations of the South East Contest Club. These are by invite
only.

How does one get a invite? Be a contester, show improved scores and be a
good team player. Thats also part of contesting.

For me, my individual station is probably below par for the "average serious
contester". I have two radios....a MP and a TS-530s. I have two linears,
a old SB-200 and a AL-811H (with 572s in it). Both get about 700 out on a
good day.

I have no beams. Just loops, verticals, and dipoles. All on a 200 x 200
piece of property.

With this I manage decent scores and have put many certificates on my wall.
Of course no first place wins in CQWWDX. But I have placed first in my
section in ARRLDX and various sweepstakes contests, etc.

Why do I contest? To improve my score by improving my station and myself.

Its as simple as that.

Have a good day

PS; I worked a bunch of sporadic skip yesterday on six meters in the June
VHF contest.....with 8 watts and a 3 ele yagi at 20'.

It's all a matter of perspective.

Dan/W4NTI

wrote in message
oups.com...
wrote:
KØHB wrote:

"Winner" has all sorts of definitions. Winning your section is
one level, winning your division another, etc. Just setting
a personal best score is winning.

Winning is beating the Yankee Clippers. Try operating at that "level"
for the ultimate contesting experience.

73 de Jim, N2EY

w3rv

You got that right. Keep an eye on W4AN. The new call for the SECC (South
East Contest Club). NQ4I is another super station to watch for. Also SECC.

Dan/W4NTI