[Cwo] SO2R - again

Fri Mar 1 12:10:05 PST 2013

Good points but.

I was using the CWT report to compare N4AF and W1RM both of whom did the
full 1 hour.

I am not suggesting that we mess with CWT only using it as an example

I am suggesting that we consider some method of separation in CWO for SO1R,
SO2R, assisted and non-assisted (I know W1FJ for one who was unhappy about
no separation there).

Now I realize it's all well and easy to make rules and a bitch to enforce
them unless you have some really slick software and even then it's hard and
I don't want to make this hard, only a bit more level.  I am very much in
favor of spreading out the "bling" as a means of perhaps attracting a wider
audience.  Yeah I know if it's too easy then it has no meaning but we are
all about supporting the newer cw op not adding another tin plate on the
overloaded shelves of the mighty (:->) (and yes I fall in that category,
having a wall covered with lovely plaques).

Pete, W1RM

From: k6rb at baymoon.com [mailto:k6rb at baymoon.com] 
Sent: Friday, March 01, 2013 1:19 PM
To: Alan Maenchen
Cc: cwo at kkn.net
Subject: Re: [Cwo] SO2R - again

I would argue in this case, too, that as participation goes up, the rules of
this contest (CWO) would make SO2R advantages dwindle. For example, in a
four hour session, if there were 600 unique calls that traversed one band
during that period, one could work a 400x400 or better with a single radio
and achieve a score 160,000. That could be a winning score, by far, and
there would be no inherent advantage for SO2R.

SO2R provides a slight advantage when participation is relatively light and
people have to move around the bands to keep up a rate over the session time
period. Of course, in a contest where you earn mults per band, and mults are
S/P/C, a great SO2R operator will most likely beat a great SO1R. In CWO (and
CWT), if you have the activity to stay on one band and can keep up rate for
the whole time, you get no advantage with SO2R.

Now, if someone wants to argue about using spotting or RBN, that's another
story. There, I would agree that someone using, say, RBN has an advantage
over someone flying blind even in a single-band foray.

Rob K6RB

In the past two CWOs, I asked for volunteer disclosure of SO2R.  Yet only
one or two logs indicated that status .. so that method failed.  One could
adopt a "10 minute" rule for SO1R, but it wouldn't be totally accurate.

I asked WA7BNM if he could add a check box on the log submission web page
for SO1R vs SOxR but so far, it hasn't happened. My goal was to identify
SO2R in the results with an asterisk (or something), but not have a separate
category.  Generally, I'm not in favor of additional categories. 

In the future, I'm open to ideas. I do think it would be useful to identify
those using SO2R in the results even though it isn't a separate category. If
you think such a "xx minute rule" would be useful in determining SO2R then
I'm open to adding that to the rules.  Maybe something like:

"SO2R will be identified in the results, but not as a separate category.
SO2R operation should be clearly indicated in your log SOAPBOX. All SO1R
operation will be limited to no less than 10 minutes on a particular band."

That's just off the top of my head. 

73, Alan  AD6E

On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 2:11 PM, k6rb at baymoon.com> wrote:

I would add the following to what John has said....

If the activity level in CWT gets to a point where 150 different stations
work the same band over an hour's time, then SO2R becomes moot. And, because
of the nature of CWT rules, that person who grabs, say, 100 Qs on 40 meters,
will have a score of 10,000 points.

In addition to the subjective advantages of SO2R versus SO1R, there are
advantages to location. If 160 is productive during an 0300Z session, and
the usual players are on it, I would argue that Left Coasters are at a
significant disadvantage on that band. So what?

When I look at my score, I don't compare myself to N4AF; I compare myself to
W6SX and N6RO (and usually come in 3rd). But, as John points out, I am
really comparing myself to me. Can I break 100 again? Can I get more mults?
Should I stay on 20 or 40 longer?

Let's not make CWT too competitive. Save that for CW Open. Let's just have
fun. Everyone who plays for the whole hour - regardless of whether running
full legal into gain antennas or 100 watts into a wet noodle - makes it more
fun for everyone else.

Rob K6RB

In general I agree with you. The debate of SO1R vs SO2R rages on within NCCC
all the time. Many would like to see the major contests recategorized to
account for the theoretical competitive advantage that SO2R stations have. A
lot, however, has to do with the skill set involved and also actual times on
the air.

Comments about the CWT Scores Table: 

1. The scores shown are not meaningful at all unless everyone operates for
the full hour in each session. Otherwise it's an Apples to Oranges
comparison. In my case, in the 0300Z session, I made 70 Qs but only could
operate 40 minutes because of a pre-scheduled conference call. You wouldn't
know that from the Scores table.

2. There were several SO1R stations who actually "beat" some of the SO2R
stations -- or did they? Compare N3JT's score of 6141 vs N4ZZ's SO2R score
of 4752 in the 1900Z session. Did they both operate for the full hour?

3. How about those Mults as a differentiator? Compare N3AD's score of 9604
with speed demon N6RO's score of 9317. N3AD made 98 Qs but captured 98
Mults. N6RO (running SO2R) made 121 Qs but only 77 Mults. And did they both
operate for the full hour?

4. I'd like to think that CWT contesters are motivated by higher scorers to
improve their own skills, because in the end we really are just competing
against ourselves each week.

Just my 4 cents.

73,

John, K6MM

On Mar 1, 2013, at 4:48 AM, Peter Chamalian wrote:

Well it's becoming very clear that SO1R and SO2R are really different
categories much the same way that unassisted and assisted is or M/S and M/2.

I offer yet another example of the CWT this past Wednesday. N4AF ran SO2R in
all three sessions (note he only specified it in one but I congratulated
Howie on his win and asked if he was SO2R and he said yes).

You can see a preview of those results here:

http://webmail.bitjanitor.net/~jhetrick/cwops/2013-02-27.html

Now I know the continuous discussion about categorization, wires vs. beams,
tribanders vs. monobanders, etc. and where do you draw the line. In this
case I think we should at least consider separating SO1R and SO2R in CWO.

Now I'm not just saying this because I've been beaten a number of times by
SO2R, in fact I'll limit my activity in CWO just to not get into that
business but I think it unfair to the SO1R guys to have to compete against
that level of headwind.

My 2-cents.

Pete, W1RM

_______________________________________________
Cwo mailing list
Cwo at kkn.net
http://www.kkn.net/mailman/listinfo/cwo

_______________________________________________
Cwo mailing list
Cwo at kkn.net
http://www.kkn.net/mailman/listinfo/cwo

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.kkn.net/pipermail/cwo/attachments/20130301/190a4594/attachment.html 