Don and all,

Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
immediate contacts are made.

As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?

73,

Cheryl, AA4YL
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.

Don and all,

Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
immediate contacts are made.

As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?

73,

Cheryl, AA4YL
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. On Jun 14, 2010, at 6/14 9:16 AM, DickT-W0RAA wrote:

> The mood seems to be "To hell with the rules. As long
> as I can do it and don't get caught, I will."

If I were Don, I would quietly report the call sign to the contest
sponsors. The log checker (didn't Eddie use to jokingly call them log
chequers? :-) may be able to legitimately nit pick his log to death
even if they couldn't get him for the one signal at a time rule
infraction.

If this person has such a big ego that he feels compelled to cheat,
not winning one of top spots in a contest will probably be just as
devastating as being turned into a check log. For such a short
sprint, losing just a couple of QSOs could matter.

Remember that Al Capone was not put away for murder, but instead for
tax evasion.

73
Chen, W7AY

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.

Don and all,

Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
immediate contacts are made.

As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?

73,

Cheryl, AA4YL
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. On Jun 14, 2010, at 6/14 9:16 AM, DickT-W0RAA wrote:

> The mood seems to be "To hell with the rules. As long
> as I can do it and don't get caught, I will."

If I were Don, I would quietly report the call sign to the contest
sponsors. The log checker (didn't Eddie use to jokingly call them log
chequers? :-) may be able to legitimately nit pick his log to death
even if they couldn't get him for the one signal at a time rule
infraction.

If this person has such a big ego that he feels compelled to cheat,
not winning one of top spots in a contest will probably be just as
devastating as being turned into a check log. For such a short
sprint, losing just a couple of QSOs could matter.

Remember that Al Capone was not put away for murder, but instead for
tax evasion.

73
Chen, W7AY

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Agreed Cheryl!
I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
together with some multi class.

73
Jim W7RY




> Don and all,
>
> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
> immediate contacts are made.
>
> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>
> 73,
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.

Don and all,

Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
immediate contacts are made.

As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?

73,

Cheryl, AA4YL
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. On Jun 14, 2010, at 6/14 9:16 AM, DickT-W0RAA wrote:

> The mood seems to be "To hell with the rules. As long
> as I can do it and don't get caught, I will."

If I were Don, I would quietly report the call sign to the contest
sponsors. The log checker (didn't Eddie use to jokingly call them log
chequers? :-) may be able to legitimately nit pick his log to death
even if they couldn't get him for the one signal at a time rule
infraction.

If this person has such a big ego that he feels compelled to cheat,
not winning one of top spots in a contest will probably be just as
devastating as being turned into a check log. For such a short
sprint, losing just a couple of QSOs could matter.

Remember that Al Capone was not put away for murder, but instead for
tax evasion.

73
Chen, W7AY

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Agreed Cheryl!
I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
together with some multi class.

73
Jim W7RY




> Don and all,
>
> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
> immediate contacts are made.
>
> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>
> 73,
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> lump it together with some multi class.

No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.

There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
stations.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
> Agreed Cheryl!
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
> together with some multi class.
>
> 73
> Jim W7RY
>
>
>
>
>> Don and all,
>>
>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
>> immediate contacts are made.
>>
>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.

Don and all,

Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
immediate contacts are made.

As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?

73,

Cheryl, AA4YL
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. On Jun 14, 2010, at 6/14 9:16 AM, DickT-W0RAA wrote:

> The mood seems to be "To hell with the rules. As long
> as I can do it and don't get caught, I will."

If I were Don, I would quietly report the call sign to the contest
sponsors. The log checker (didn't Eddie use to jokingly call them log
chequers? :-) may be able to legitimately nit pick his log to death
even if they couldn't get him for the one signal at a time rule
infraction.

If this person has such a big ego that he feels compelled to cheat,
not winning one of top spots in a contest will probably be just as
devastating as being turned into a check log. For such a short
sprint, losing just a couple of QSOs could matter.

Remember that Al Capone was not put away for murder, but instead for
tax evasion.

73
Chen, W7AY

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Agreed Cheryl!
I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
together with some multi class.

73
Jim W7RY




> Don and all,
>
> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
> immediate contacts are made.
>
> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>
> 73,
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> lump it together with some multi class.

No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.

There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
stations.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
> Agreed Cheryl!
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
> together with some multi class.
>
> 73
> Jim W7RY
>
>
>
>
>> Don and all,
>>
>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
>> immediate contacts are made.
>>
>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL




>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
> stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.

Don and all,

Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
immediate contacts are made.

As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?

73,

Cheryl, AA4YL
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. On Jun 14, 2010, at 6/14 9:16 AM, DickT-W0RAA wrote:

> The mood seems to be "To hell with the rules. As long
> as I can do it and don't get caught, I will."

If I were Don, I would quietly report the call sign to the contest
sponsors. The log checker (didn't Eddie use to jokingly call them log
chequers? :-) may be able to legitimately nit pick his log to death
even if they couldn't get him for the one signal at a time rule
infraction.

If this person has such a big ego that he feels compelled to cheat,
not winning one of top spots in a contest will probably be just as
devastating as being turned into a check log. For such a short
sprint, losing just a couple of QSOs could matter.

Remember that Al Capone was not put away for murder, but instead for
tax evasion.

73
Chen, W7AY

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Agreed Cheryl!
I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
together with some multi class.

73
Jim W7RY




> Don and all,
>
> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
> immediate contacts are made.
>
> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>
> 73,
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> lump it together with some multi class.

No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.

There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
stations.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
> Agreed Cheryl!
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
> together with some multi class.
>
> 73
> Jim W7RY
>
>
>
>
>> Don and all,
>>
>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
>> immediate contacts are made.
>>
>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL




>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
> stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
Geez -- could we just skip the annual multi-hundred message SO2R debate?

-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Cheryl Whitlock
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 15:20
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL



_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.

Don and all,

Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
immediate contacts are made.

As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?

73,

Cheryl, AA4YL
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. On Jun 14, 2010, at 6/14 9:16 AM, DickT-W0RAA wrote:

> The mood seems to be "To hell with the rules. As long
> as I can do it and don't get caught, I will."

If I were Don, I would quietly report the call sign to the contest
sponsors. The log checker (didn't Eddie use to jokingly call them log
chequers? :-) may be able to legitimately nit pick his log to death
even if they couldn't get him for the one signal at a time rule
infraction.

If this person has such a big ego that he feels compelled to cheat,
not winning one of top spots in a contest will probably be just as
devastating as being turned into a check log. For such a short
sprint, losing just a couple of QSOs could matter.

Remember that Al Capone was not put away for murder, but instead for
tax evasion.

73
Chen, W7AY

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Agreed Cheryl!
I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
together with some multi class.

73
Jim W7RY




> Don and all,
>
> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
> immediate contacts are made.
>
> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>
> 73,
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> lump it together with some multi class.

No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.

There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
stations.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
> Agreed Cheryl!
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
> together with some multi class.
>
> 73
> Jim W7RY
>
>
>
>
>> Don and all,
>>
>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
>> immediate contacts are made.
>>
>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL




>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
> stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
Geez -- could we just skip the annual multi-hundred message SO2R debate?

-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Cheryl Whitlock
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 15:20
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL



_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,

You do have a delete key on your keyboard, right?



> wrote:
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.

Don and all,

Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
immediate contacts are made.

As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?

73,

Cheryl, AA4YL
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. On Jun 14, 2010, at 6/14 9:16 AM, DickT-W0RAA wrote:

> The mood seems to be "To hell with the rules. As long
> as I can do it and don't get caught, I will."

If I were Don, I would quietly report the call sign to the contest
sponsors. The log checker (didn't Eddie use to jokingly call them log
chequers? :-) may be able to legitimately nit pick his log to death
even if they couldn't get him for the one signal at a time rule
infraction.

If this person has such a big ego that he feels compelled to cheat,
not winning one of top spots in a contest will probably be just as
devastating as being turned into a check log. For such a short
sprint, losing just a couple of QSOs could matter.

Remember that Al Capone was not put away for murder, but instead for
tax evasion.

73
Chen, W7AY

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Agreed Cheryl!
I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
together with some multi class.

73
Jim W7RY




> Don and all,
>
> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
> immediate contacts are made.
>
> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>
> 73,
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> lump it together with some multi class.

No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.

There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
stations.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
> Agreed Cheryl!
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
> together with some multi class.
>
> 73
> Jim W7RY
>
>
>
>
>> Don and all,
>>
>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
>> immediate contacts are made.
>>
>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL




>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
> stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
Geez -- could we just skip the annual multi-hundred message SO2R debate?

-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Cheryl Whitlock
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 15:20
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL



_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,

You do have a delete key on your keyboard, right?



> wrote:
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. That's correct they're switching back and forth quickly enough
that there is no "down time" on either frequency. A LEGAL SO2R
operator will still not transmit on both frequencies at the same
time but that doesn't mean he can't transmit on one and be
copying a station on the other.

Still, it's nothing more than rapid band switching as long as
one has the skill and hardware to make it work.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 4:19 PM, Cheryl Whitlock wrote:
> I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
> other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
> try, I will get told the frequency is in use.
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
>
>
>
>
>>
>> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
>> > lump it together with some multi class.
>>
>> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
>> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
>> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
>> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
>> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>>
>> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
>> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
>> stations.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.

Don and all,

Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
immediate contacts are made.

As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?

73,

Cheryl, AA4YL
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. On Jun 14, 2010, at 6/14 9:16 AM, DickT-W0RAA wrote:

> The mood seems to be "To hell with the rules. As long
> as I can do it and don't get caught, I will."

If I were Don, I would quietly report the call sign to the contest
sponsors. The log checker (didn't Eddie use to jokingly call them log
chequers? :-) may be able to legitimately nit pick his log to death
even if they couldn't get him for the one signal at a time rule
infraction.

If this person has such a big ego that he feels compelled to cheat,
not winning one of top spots in a contest will probably be just as
devastating as being turned into a check log. For such a short
sprint, losing just a couple of QSOs could matter.

Remember that Al Capone was not put away for murder, but instead for
tax evasion.

73
Chen, W7AY

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Agreed Cheryl!
I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
together with some multi class.

73
Jim W7RY




> Don and all,
>
> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
> immediate contacts are made.
>
> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>
> 73,
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> lump it together with some multi class.

No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.

There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
stations.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
> Agreed Cheryl!
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
> together with some multi class.
>
> 73
> Jim W7RY
>
>
>
>
>> Don and all,
>>
>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
>> immediate contacts are made.
>>
>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL




>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
> stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
Geez -- could we just skip the annual multi-hundred message SO2R debate?

-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Cheryl Whitlock
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 15:20
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL



_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,

You do have a delete key on your keyboard, right?



> wrote:
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. That's correct they're switching back and forth quickly enough
that there is no "down time" on either frequency. A LEGAL SO2R
operator will still not transmit on both frequencies at the same
time but that doesn't mean he can't transmit on one and be
copying a station on the other.

Still, it's nothing more than rapid band switching as long as
one has the skill and hardware to make it work.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 4:19 PM, Cheryl Whitlock wrote:
> I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
> other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
> try, I will get told the frequency is in use.
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
>
>
>
>
>>
>> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
>> > lump it together with some multi class.
>>
>> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
>> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
>> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
>> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
>> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>>
>> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
>> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
>> stations.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
There is no contest that has a "multi-transmitter" class for
single operators. Even for multi-operator classes the class
is based on the number of simultaneous SIGNALS not the number
of transmitters in the station.

Keep the discussion productions - stop the class warfare.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 5:05 PM, James Colville wrote:
>
>>
>> Marty,
>>
>> Like you I'm tired of the semi-annual attack on SO2R operators and
>> those who use every alleged instance of cheating as a pretense to
>> attack SO2R.
>>
>> > A single op operating one station cannot compete with another
>> > single op who possess the skill and hardware to operate two
>> > stations almost simo.
>>
>> And the answer to that is "so what?" Nowhere else in amateur
>> radio do we separate operators by skill levels, antenna size,
>> transceiver sensitivity, number of receivers, or any number
>> of other parameters.
>>
>> ## On the contrary.
> ## We put those folks in the multi transmitter class.
>
>
>
>> Keep the discussion productive and address cheating - stop using
>> the cheating problem as a pretense to engage in the amateur
>> equivalent of class warfare.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>> On 6/14/2010 4:23 PM, Martin Bluhm wrote:
>>> Sorry Joe, but have to disagree with you on this one up to a point. On
>> the
>>> cheating angle, I have to agree.
>>> This horse was ridden very hard and hung up soaking wet a few months
>> back.
>>> My feelings towards SO2R have not changed; although
>>> Like I say in the terms of cheating, I go along with you. Not opening the
>>> former thread again, it comes down to a competitive nature,
>>> Where the SO2R ops should be in a class by themselves. They are very
>> skilled
>>> and my hats off to them for doing what they do. A single op operating one
>>> station cannot compete with another single op who possess the skill and
>>> hardware to operate two stations almost simo. The numbers do not add up.
>>> Let them compete with each other. That is the only way.
>>>
>>> Enough said, back into the woodwork.
>>> 73
>>> Marty
>>> W8AKS
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> Behalf Of Joe Subich, W4TV
>>> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 20:13
>>> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating
>>>
>>>
>>> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
>>> > lump it together with some multi class.
>>>
>>> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
>>> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
>>> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
>>> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
>>> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>>>
>>> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
>>> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
>>> stations.
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>>
>>> On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
>>>> Agreed Cheryl!
>>>> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump
>>> it
>>>> together with some multi class.
>>>>
>>>> 73
>>>> Jim W7RY
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Don and all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough,
>>> but
>>>>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>>>>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors
>>> start
>>>>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It
>>> really
>>>>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but
>> no
>>>>> immediate contacts are made.
>>>>>
>>>>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in
>> the
>>>>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>>>>
>>>>> 73,
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>>>>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.

Don and all,

Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
immediate contacts are made.

As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?

73,

Cheryl, AA4YL
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. On Jun 14, 2010, at 6/14 9:16 AM, DickT-W0RAA wrote:

> The mood seems to be "To hell with the rules. As long
> as I can do it and don't get caught, I will."

If I were Don, I would quietly report the call sign to the contest
sponsors. The log checker (didn't Eddie use to jokingly call them log
chequers? :-) may be able to legitimately nit pick his log to death
even if they couldn't get him for the one signal at a time rule
infraction.

If this person has such a big ego that he feels compelled to cheat,
not winning one of top spots in a contest will probably be just as
devastating as being turned into a check log. For such a short
sprint, losing just a couple of QSOs could matter.

Remember that Al Capone was not put away for murder, but instead for
tax evasion.

73
Chen, W7AY

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Agreed Cheryl!
I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
together with some multi class.

73
Jim W7RY




> Don and all,
>
> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
> immediate contacts are made.
>
> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>
> 73,
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> lump it together with some multi class.

No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.

There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
stations.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
> Agreed Cheryl!
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
> together with some multi class.
>
> 73
> Jim W7RY
>
>
>
>
>> Don and all,
>>
>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
>> immediate contacts are made.
>>
>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL




>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
> stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
Geez -- could we just skip the annual multi-hundred message SO2R debate?

-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Cheryl Whitlock
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 15:20
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL



_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,

You do have a delete key on your keyboard, right?



> wrote:
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. That's correct they're switching back and forth quickly enough
that there is no "down time" on either frequency. A LEGAL SO2R
operator will still not transmit on both frequencies at the same
time but that doesn't mean he can't transmit on one and be
copying a station on the other.

Still, it's nothing more than rapid band switching as long as
one has the skill and hardware to make it work.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 4:19 PM, Cheryl Whitlock wrote:
> I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
> other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
> try, I will get told the frequency is in use.
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
>
>
>
>
>>
>> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
>> > lump it together with some multi class.
>>
>> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
>> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
>> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
>> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
>> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>>
>> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
>> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
>> stations.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
There is no contest that has a "multi-transmitter" class for
single operators. Even for multi-operator classes the class
is based on the number of simultaneous SIGNALS not the number
of transmitters in the station.

Keep the discussion productions - stop the class warfare.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 5:05 PM, James Colville wrote:
>
>>
>> Marty,
>>
>> Like you I'm tired of the semi-annual attack on SO2R operators and
>> those who use every alleged instance of cheating as a pretense to
>> attack SO2R.
>>
>> > A single op operating one station cannot compete with another
>> > single op who possess the skill and hardware to operate two
>> > stations almost simo.
>>
>> And the answer to that is "so what?" Nowhere else in amateur
>> radio do we separate operators by skill levels, antenna size,
>> transceiver sensitivity, number of receivers, or any number
>> of other parameters.
>>
>> ## On the contrary.
> ## We put those folks in the multi transmitter class.
>
>
>
>> Keep the discussion productive and address cheating - stop using
>> the cheating problem as a pretense to engage in the amateur
>> equivalent of class warfare.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>> On 6/14/2010 4:23 PM, Martin Bluhm wrote:
>>> Sorry Joe, but have to disagree with you on this one up to a point. On
>> the
>>> cheating angle, I have to agree.
>>> This horse was ridden very hard and hung up soaking wet a few months
>> back.
>>> My feelings towards SO2R have not changed; although
>>> Like I say in the terms of cheating, I go along with you. Not opening the
>>> former thread again, it comes down to a competitive nature,
>>> Where the SO2R ops should be in a class by themselves. They are very
>> skilled
>>> and my hats off to them for doing what they do. A single op operating one
>>> station cannot compete with another single op who possess the skill and
>>> hardware to operate two stations almost simo. The numbers do not add up.
>>> Let them compete with each other. That is the only way.
>>>
>>> Enough said, back into the woodwork.
>>> 73
>>> Marty
>>> W8AKS
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> Behalf Of Joe Subich, W4TV
>>> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 20:13
>>> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating
>>>
>>>
>>> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
>>> > lump it together with some multi class.
>>>
>>> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
>>> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
>>> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
>>> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
>>> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>>>
>>> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
>>> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
>>> stations.
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>>
>>> On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
>>>> Agreed Cheryl!
>>>> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump
>>> it
>>>> together with some multi class.
>>>>
>>>> 73
>>>> Jim W7RY
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Don and all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough,
>>> but
>>>>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>>>>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors
>>> start
>>>>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It
>>> really
>>>>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but
>> no
>>>>> immediate contacts are made.
>>>>>
>>>>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in
>> the
>>>>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>>>>
>>>>> 73,
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>>>>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
Absolutely on the nail, Joe.

Let's keep it clear. If someone is cheating in a contest, in any way,
regardless of how many radios they have or what colour shirt they wear,
report them to the contest managers. The contest organisers made the rules
which are being broken. They can take action.

In any contest there will always be someone with a bigger amp, more radios,
stacked monobanders etc. They still need to be highly skilled operators; my
amateur radio licence was issued on the basis that it was for my
self-training and I am still learning after ** years! Now what's the best
time for 3C0 on 40 ....................

Cheers,

John GW4SKA




----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 9:13 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating


>
>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
> stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
> On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
>> Agreed Cheryl!
>> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump
>> it
>> together with some multi class.
>>
>> 73
>> Jim W7RY
>>
>>
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Don and all,
>>>
>>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough,
>>> but
>>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors
>>> start
>>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It
>>> really
>>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but
>>> no
>>> immediate contacts are made.
>>>
>>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in
>>> the
>>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.

Don and all,

Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
immediate contacts are made.

As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?

73,

Cheryl, AA4YL
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. On Jun 14, 2010, at 6/14 9:16 AM, DickT-W0RAA wrote:

> The mood seems to be "To hell with the rules. As long
> as I can do it and don't get caught, I will."

If I were Don, I would quietly report the call sign to the contest
sponsors. The log checker (didn't Eddie use to jokingly call them log
chequers? :-) may be able to legitimately nit pick his log to death
even if they couldn't get him for the one signal at a time rule
infraction.

If this person has such a big ego that he feels compelled to cheat,
not winning one of top spots in a contest will probably be just as
devastating as being turned into a check log. For such a short
sprint, losing just a couple of QSOs could matter.

Remember that Al Capone was not put away for murder, but instead for
tax evasion.

73
Chen, W7AY

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Agreed Cheryl!
I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
together with some multi class.

73
Jim W7RY




> Don and all,
>
> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
> immediate contacts are made.
>
> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>
> 73,
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> lump it together with some multi class.

No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.

There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
stations.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
> Agreed Cheryl!
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
> together with some multi class.
>
> 73
> Jim W7RY
>
>
>
>
>> Don and all,
>>
>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
>> immediate contacts are made.
>>
>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL




>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
> stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
Geez -- could we just skip the annual multi-hundred message SO2R debate?

-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Cheryl Whitlock
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 15:20
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL



_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,

You do have a delete key on your keyboard, right?



> wrote:
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. That's correct they're switching back and forth quickly enough
that there is no "down time" on either frequency. A LEGAL SO2R
operator will still not transmit on both frequencies at the same
time but that doesn't mean he can't transmit on one and be
copying a station on the other.

Still, it's nothing more than rapid band switching as long as
one has the skill and hardware to make it work.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 4:19 PM, Cheryl Whitlock wrote:
> I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
> other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
> try, I will get told the frequency is in use.
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
>
>
>
>
>>
>> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
>> > lump it together with some multi class.
>>
>> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
>> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
>> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
>> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
>> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>>
>> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
>> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
>> stations.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
There is no contest that has a "multi-transmitter" class for
single operators. Even for multi-operator classes the class
is based on the number of simultaneous SIGNALS not the number
of transmitters in the station.

Keep the discussion productions - stop the class warfare.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 5:05 PM, James Colville wrote:
>
>>
>> Marty,
>>
>> Like you I'm tired of the semi-annual attack on SO2R operators and
>> those who use every alleged instance of cheating as a pretense to
>> attack SO2R.
>>
>> > A single op operating one station cannot compete with another
>> > single op who possess the skill and hardware to operate two
>> > stations almost simo.
>>
>> And the answer to that is "so what?" Nowhere else in amateur
>> radio do we separate operators by skill levels, antenna size,
>> transceiver sensitivity, number of receivers, or any number
>> of other parameters.
>>
>> ## On the contrary.
> ## We put those folks in the multi transmitter class.
>
>
>
>> Keep the discussion productive and address cheating - stop using
>> the cheating problem as a pretense to engage in the amateur
>> equivalent of class warfare.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>> On 6/14/2010 4:23 PM, Martin Bluhm wrote:
>>> Sorry Joe, but have to disagree with you on this one up to a point. On
>> the
>>> cheating angle, I have to agree.
>>> This horse was ridden very hard and hung up soaking wet a few months
>> back.
>>> My feelings towards SO2R have not changed; although
>>> Like I say in the terms of cheating, I go along with you. Not opening the
>>> former thread again, it comes down to a competitive nature,
>>> Where the SO2R ops should be in a class by themselves. They are very
>> skilled
>>> and my hats off to them for doing what they do. A single op operating one
>>> station cannot compete with another single op who possess the skill and
>>> hardware to operate two stations almost simo. The numbers do not add up.
>>> Let them compete with each other. That is the only way.
>>>
>>> Enough said, back into the woodwork.
>>> 73
>>> Marty
>>> W8AKS
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> Behalf Of Joe Subich, W4TV
>>> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 20:13
>>> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating
>>>
>>>
>>> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
>>> > lump it together with some multi class.
>>>
>>> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
>>> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
>>> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
>>> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
>>> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>>>
>>> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
>>> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
>>> stations.
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>>
>>> On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
>>>> Agreed Cheryl!
>>>> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump
>>> it
>>>> together with some multi class.
>>>>
>>>> 73
>>>> Jim W7RY
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Don and all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough,
>>> but
>>>>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>>>>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors
>>> start
>>>>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It
>>> really
>>>>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but
>> no
>>>>> immediate contacts are made.
>>>>>
>>>>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in
>> the
>>>>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>>>>
>>>>> 73,
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>>>>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
Absolutely on the nail, Joe.

Let's keep it clear. If someone is cheating in a contest, in any way,
regardless of how many radios they have or what colour shirt they wear,
report them to the contest managers. The contest organisers made the rules
which are being broken. They can take action.

In any contest there will always be someone with a bigger amp, more radios,
stacked monobanders etc. They still need to be highly skilled operators; my
amateur radio licence was issued on the basis that it was for my
self-training and I am still learning after ** years! Now what's the best
time for 3C0 on 40 ....................

Cheers,

John GW4SKA




----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 9:13 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating


>
>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
> stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
> On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
>> Agreed Cheryl!
>> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump
>> it
>> together with some multi class.
>>
>> 73
>> Jim W7RY
>>
>>
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Don and all,
>>>
>>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough,
>>> but
>>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors
>>> start
>>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It
>>> really
>>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but
>>> no
>>> immediate contacts are made.
>>>
>>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in
>>> the
>>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
There is no way a Single Op, with a Single transmitter should be up
against SO2R.

Sure someone can come up with a blackbox to keep only one signal on air
at any given time,
but still you have the distinct adavantages of two separate radios.


Time to let them be in their own class.

Mike, WB9B

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.

Don and all,

Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
immediate contacts are made.

As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?

73,

Cheryl, AA4YL
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. On Jun 14, 2010, at 6/14 9:16 AM, DickT-W0RAA wrote:

> The mood seems to be "To hell with the rules. As long
> as I can do it and don't get caught, I will."

If I were Don, I would quietly report the call sign to the contest
sponsors. The log checker (didn't Eddie use to jokingly call them log
chequers? :-) may be able to legitimately nit pick his log to death
even if they couldn't get him for the one signal at a time rule
infraction.

If this person has such a big ego that he feels compelled to cheat,
not winning one of top spots in a contest will probably be just as
devastating as being turned into a check log. For such a short
sprint, losing just a couple of QSOs could matter.

Remember that Al Capone was not put away for murder, but instead for
tax evasion.

73
Chen, W7AY

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Agreed Cheryl!
I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
together with some multi class.

73
Jim W7RY




> Don and all,
>
> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
> immediate contacts are made.
>
> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>
> 73,
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> lump it together with some multi class.

No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.

There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
stations.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
> Agreed Cheryl!
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
> together with some multi class.
>
> 73
> Jim W7RY
>
>
>
>
>> Don and all,
>>
>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
>> immediate contacts are made.
>>
>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL




>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
> stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
Geez -- could we just skip the annual multi-hundred message SO2R debate?

-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Cheryl Whitlock
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 15:20
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL



_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,

You do have a delete key on your keyboard, right?



> wrote:
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. That's correct they're switching back and forth quickly enough
that there is no "down time" on either frequency. A LEGAL SO2R
operator will still not transmit on both frequencies at the same
time but that doesn't mean he can't transmit on one and be
copying a station on the other.

Still, it's nothing more than rapid band switching as long as
one has the skill and hardware to make it work.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 4:19 PM, Cheryl Whitlock wrote:
> I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
> other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
> try, I will get told the frequency is in use.
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
>
>
>
>
>>
>> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
>> > lump it together with some multi class.
>>
>> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
>> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
>> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
>> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
>> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>>
>> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
>> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
>> stations.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
There is no contest that has a "multi-transmitter" class for
single operators. Even for multi-operator classes the class
is based on the number of simultaneous SIGNALS not the number
of transmitters in the station.

Keep the discussion productions - stop the class warfare.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 5:05 PM, James Colville wrote:
>
>>
>> Marty,
>>
>> Like you I'm tired of the semi-annual attack on SO2R operators and
>> those who use every alleged instance of cheating as a pretense to
>> attack SO2R.
>>
>> > A single op operating one station cannot compete with another
>> > single op who possess the skill and hardware to operate two
>> > stations almost simo.
>>
>> And the answer to that is "so what?" Nowhere else in amateur
>> radio do we separate operators by skill levels, antenna size,
>> transceiver sensitivity, number of receivers, or any number
>> of other parameters.
>>
>> ## On the contrary.
> ## We put those folks in the multi transmitter class.
>
>
>
>> Keep the discussion productive and address cheating - stop using
>> the cheating problem as a pretense to engage in the amateur
>> equivalent of class warfare.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>> On 6/14/2010 4:23 PM, Martin Bluhm wrote:
>>> Sorry Joe, but have to disagree with you on this one up to a point. On
>> the
>>> cheating angle, I have to agree.
>>> This horse was ridden very hard and hung up soaking wet a few months
>> back.
>>> My feelings towards SO2R have not changed; although
>>> Like I say in the terms of cheating, I go along with you. Not opening the
>>> former thread again, it comes down to a competitive nature,
>>> Where the SO2R ops should be in a class by themselves. They are very
>> skilled
>>> and my hats off to them for doing what they do. A single op operating one
>>> station cannot compete with another single op who possess the skill and
>>> hardware to operate two stations almost simo. The numbers do not add up.
>>> Let them compete with each other. That is the only way.
>>>
>>> Enough said, back into the woodwork.
>>> 73
>>> Marty
>>> W8AKS
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> Behalf Of Joe Subich, W4TV
>>> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 20:13
>>> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating
>>>
>>>
>>> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
>>> > lump it together with some multi class.
>>>
>>> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
>>> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
>>> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
>>> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
>>> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>>>
>>> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
>>> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
>>> stations.
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>>
>>> On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
>>>> Agreed Cheryl!
>>>> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump
>>> it
>>>> together with some multi class.
>>>>
>>>> 73
>>>> Jim W7RY
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Don and all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough,
>>> but
>>>>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>>>>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors
>>> start
>>>>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It
>>> really
>>>>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but
>> no
>>>>> immediate contacts are made.
>>>>>
>>>>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in
>> the
>>>>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>>>>
>>>>> 73,
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>>>>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
Absolutely on the nail, Joe.

Let's keep it clear. If someone is cheating in a contest, in any way,
regardless of how many radios they have or what colour shirt they wear,
report them to the contest managers. The contest organisers made the rules
which are being broken. They can take action.

In any contest there will always be someone with a bigger amp, more radios,
stacked monobanders etc. They still need to be highly skilled operators; my
amateur radio licence was issued on the basis that it was for my
self-training and I am still learning after ** years! Now what's the best
time for 3C0 on 40 ....................

Cheers,

John GW4SKA




----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 9:13 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating


>
>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
> stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
> On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
>> Agreed Cheryl!
>> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump
>> it
>> together with some multi class.
>>
>> 73
>> Jim W7RY
>>
>>
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Don and all,
>>>
>>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough,
>>> but
>>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors
>>> start
>>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It
>>> really
>>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but
>>> no
>>> immediate contacts are made.
>>>
>>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in
>>> the
>>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
There is no way a Single Op, with a Single transmitter should be up
against SO2R.

Sure someone can come up with a blackbox to keep only one signal on air
at any given time,
but still you have the distinct adavantages of two separate radios.


Time to let them be in their own class.

Mike, WB9B

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. "There is no way that someone with a trap vertical and a low wire
should be up against those with stacks of monobanders on multiple
towers. The station with multiple monoband stacks has an advantage
that no level of skill can overcome.

Time to let them be in their own class."

That sounds just about as silly to me as separate classes for those
with more than one transceiver.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 5:49 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
> There is no way a Single Op, with a Single transmitter should be up
> against SO2R.
>
> Sure someone can come up with a blackbox to keep only one signal on air
> at any given time,
> but still you have the distinct adavantages of two separate radios.
>
>
> Time to let them be in their own class.
>
> Mike, WB9B
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.

Don and all,

Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
immediate contacts are made.

As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?

73,

Cheryl, AA4YL
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. On Jun 14, 2010, at 6/14 9:16 AM, DickT-W0RAA wrote:

> The mood seems to be "To hell with the rules. As long
> as I can do it and don't get caught, I will."

If I were Don, I would quietly report the call sign to the contest
sponsors. The log checker (didn't Eddie use to jokingly call them log
chequers? :-) may be able to legitimately nit pick his log to death
even if they couldn't get him for the one signal at a time rule
infraction.

If this person has such a big ego that he feels compelled to cheat,
not winning one of top spots in a contest will probably be just as
devastating as being turned into a check log. For such a short
sprint, losing just a couple of QSOs could matter.

Remember that Al Capone was not put away for murder, but instead for
tax evasion.

73
Chen, W7AY

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Agreed Cheryl!
I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
together with some multi class.

73
Jim W7RY




> Don and all,
>
> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
> immediate contacts are made.
>
> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>
> 73,
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> lump it together with some multi class.

No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.

There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
stations.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
> Agreed Cheryl!
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
> together with some multi class.
>
> 73
> Jim W7RY
>
>
>
>
>> Don and all,
>>
>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
>> immediate contacts are made.
>>
>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL




>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
> stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
Geez -- could we just skip the annual multi-hundred message SO2R debate?

-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Cheryl Whitlock
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 15:20
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL



_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,

You do have a delete key on your keyboard, right?



> wrote:
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. That's correct they're switching back and forth quickly enough
that there is no "down time" on either frequency. A LEGAL SO2R
operator will still not transmit on both frequencies at the same
time but that doesn't mean he can't transmit on one and be
copying a station on the other.

Still, it's nothing more than rapid band switching as long as
one has the skill and hardware to make it work.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 4:19 PM, Cheryl Whitlock wrote:
> I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
> other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
> try, I will get told the frequency is in use.
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
>
>
>
>
>>
>> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
>> > lump it together with some multi class.
>>
>> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
>> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
>> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
>> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
>> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>>
>> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
>> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
>> stations.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
There is no contest that has a "multi-transmitter" class for
single operators. Even for multi-operator classes the class
is based on the number of simultaneous SIGNALS not the number
of transmitters in the station.

Keep the discussion productions - stop the class warfare.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 5:05 PM, James Colville wrote:
>
>>
>> Marty,
>>
>> Like you I'm tired of the semi-annual attack on SO2R operators and
>> those who use every alleged instance of cheating as a pretense to
>> attack SO2R.
>>
>> > A single op operating one station cannot compete with another
>> > single op who possess the skill and hardware to operate two
>> > stations almost simo.
>>
>> And the answer to that is "so what?" Nowhere else in amateur
>> radio do we separate operators by skill levels, antenna size,
>> transceiver sensitivity, number of receivers, or any number
>> of other parameters.
>>
>> ## On the contrary.
> ## We put those folks in the multi transmitter class.
>
>
>
>> Keep the discussion productive and address cheating - stop using
>> the cheating problem as a pretense to engage in the amateur
>> equivalent of class warfare.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>> On 6/14/2010 4:23 PM, Martin Bluhm wrote:
>>> Sorry Joe, but have to disagree with you on this one up to a point. On
>> the
>>> cheating angle, I have to agree.
>>> This horse was ridden very hard and hung up soaking wet a few months
>> back.
>>> My feelings towards SO2R have not changed; although
>>> Like I say in the terms of cheating, I go along with you. Not opening the
>>> former thread again, it comes down to a competitive nature,
>>> Where the SO2R ops should be in a class by themselves. They are very
>> skilled
>>> and my hats off to them for doing what they do. A single op operating one
>>> station cannot compete with another single op who possess the skill and
>>> hardware to operate two stations almost simo. The numbers do not add up.
>>> Let them compete with each other. That is the only way.
>>>
>>> Enough said, back into the woodwork.
>>> 73
>>> Marty
>>> W8AKS
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> Behalf Of Joe Subich, W4TV
>>> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 20:13
>>> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating
>>>
>>>
>>> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
>>> > lump it together with some multi class.
>>>
>>> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
>>> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
>>> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
>>> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
>>> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>>>
>>> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
>>> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
>>> stations.
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>>
>>> On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
>>>> Agreed Cheryl!
>>>> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump
>>> it
>>>> together with some multi class.
>>>>
>>>> 73
>>>> Jim W7RY
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Don and all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough,
>>> but
>>>>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>>>>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors
>>> start
>>>>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It
>>> really
>>>>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but
>> no
>>>>> immediate contacts are made.
>>>>>
>>>>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in
>> the
>>>>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>>>>
>>>>> 73,
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>>>>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
Absolutely on the nail, Joe.

Let's keep it clear. If someone is cheating in a contest, in any way,
regardless of how many radios they have or what colour shirt they wear,
report them to the contest managers. The contest organisers made the rules
which are being broken. They can take action.

In any contest there will always be someone with a bigger amp, more radios,
stacked monobanders etc. They still need to be highly skilled operators; my
amateur radio licence was issued on the basis that it was for my
self-training and I am still learning after ** years! Now what's the best
time for 3C0 on 40 ....................

Cheers,

John GW4SKA




----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 9:13 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating


>
>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
> stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
> On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
>> Agreed Cheryl!
>> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump
>> it
>> together with some multi class.
>>
>> 73
>> Jim W7RY
>>
>>
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Don and all,
>>>
>>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough,
>>> but
>>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors
>>> start
>>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It
>>> really
>>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but
>>> no
>>> immediate contacts are made.
>>>
>>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in
>>> the
>>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
There is no way a Single Op, with a Single transmitter should be up
against SO2R.

Sure someone can come up with a blackbox to keep only one signal on air
at any given time,
but still you have the distinct adavantages of two separate radios.


Time to let them be in their own class.

Mike, WB9B

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. "There is no way that someone with a trap vertical and a low wire
should be up against those with stacks of monobanders on multiple
towers. The station with multiple monoband stacks has an advantage
that no level of skill can overcome.

Time to let them be in their own class."

That sounds just about as silly to me as separate classes for those
with more than one transceiver.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 5:49 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
> There is no way a Single Op, with a Single transmitter should be up
> against SO2R.
>
> Sure someone can come up with a blackbox to keep only one signal on air
> at any given time,
> but still you have the distinct adavantages of two separate radios.
>
>
> Time to let them be in their own class.
>
> Mike, WB9B
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Just a joke friends.

If the station using "stacks of monobanders on multiple Towers" is running
QRP and the station using "trap vertical and a low wire" is running 15KW
they might be able to out score.

73 ES CUL
__________________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.

Don and all,

Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
immediate contacts are made.

As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?

73,

Cheryl, AA4YL
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. On Jun 14, 2010, at 6/14 9:16 AM, DickT-W0RAA wrote:

> The mood seems to be "To hell with the rules. As long
> as I can do it and don't get caught, I will."

If I were Don, I would quietly report the call sign to the contest
sponsors. The log checker (didn't Eddie use to jokingly call them log
chequers? :-) may be able to legitimately nit pick his log to death
even if they couldn't get him for the one signal at a time rule
infraction.

If this person has such a big ego that he feels compelled to cheat,
not winning one of top spots in a contest will probably be just as
devastating as being turned into a check log. For such a short
sprint, losing just a couple of QSOs could matter.

Remember that Al Capone was not put away for murder, but instead for
tax evasion.

73
Chen, W7AY

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Agreed Cheryl!
I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
together with some multi class.

73
Jim W7RY




> Don and all,
>
> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
> immediate contacts are made.
>
> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>
> 73,
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> lump it together with some multi class.

No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.

There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
stations.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
> Agreed Cheryl!
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
> together with some multi class.
>
> 73
> Jim W7RY
>
>
>
>
>> Don and all,
>>
>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
>> immediate contacts are made.
>>
>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL




>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
> stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
Geez -- could we just skip the annual multi-hundred message SO2R debate?

-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Cheryl Whitlock
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 15:20
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL



_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,

You do have a delete key on your keyboard, right?



> wrote:
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. That's correct they're switching back and forth quickly enough
that there is no "down time" on either frequency. A LEGAL SO2R
operator will still not transmit on both frequencies at the same
time but that doesn't mean he can't transmit on one and be
copying a station on the other.

Still, it's nothing more than rapid band switching as long as
one has the skill and hardware to make it work.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 4:19 PM, Cheryl Whitlock wrote:
> I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
> other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
> try, I will get told the frequency is in use.
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
>
>
>
>
>>
>> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
>> > lump it together with some multi class.
>>
>> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
>> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
>> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
>> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
>> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>>
>> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
>> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
>> stations.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
There is no contest that has a "multi-transmitter" class for
single operators. Even for multi-operator classes the class
is based on the number of simultaneous SIGNALS not the number
of transmitters in the station.

Keep the discussion productions - stop the class warfare.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 5:05 PM, James Colville wrote:
>
>>
>> Marty,
>>
>> Like you I'm tired of the semi-annual attack on SO2R operators and
>> those who use every alleged instance of cheating as a pretense to
>> attack SO2R.
>>
>> > A single op operating one station cannot compete with another
>> > single op who possess the skill and hardware to operate two
>> > stations almost simo.
>>
>> And the answer to that is "so what?" Nowhere else in amateur
>> radio do we separate operators by skill levels, antenna size,
>> transceiver sensitivity, number of receivers, or any number
>> of other parameters.
>>
>> ## On the contrary.
> ## We put those folks in the multi transmitter class.
>
>
>
>> Keep the discussion productive and address cheating - stop using
>> the cheating problem as a pretense to engage in the amateur
>> equivalent of class warfare.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>> On 6/14/2010 4:23 PM, Martin Bluhm wrote:
>>> Sorry Joe, but have to disagree with you on this one up to a point. On
>> the
>>> cheating angle, I have to agree.
>>> This horse was ridden very hard and hung up soaking wet a few months
>> back.
>>> My feelings towards SO2R have not changed; although
>>> Like I say in the terms of cheating, I go along with you. Not opening the
>>> former thread again, it comes down to a competitive nature,
>>> Where the SO2R ops should be in a class by themselves. They are very
>> skilled
>>> and my hats off to them for doing what they do. A single op operating one
>>> station cannot compete with another single op who possess the skill and
>>> hardware to operate two stations almost simo. The numbers do not add up.
>>> Let them compete with each other. That is the only way.
>>>
>>> Enough said, back into the woodwork.
>>> 73
>>> Marty
>>> W8AKS
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> Behalf Of Joe Subich, W4TV
>>> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 20:13
>>> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating
>>>
>>>
>>> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
>>> > lump it together with some multi class.
>>>
>>> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
>>> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
>>> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
>>> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
>>> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>>>
>>> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
>>> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
>>> stations.
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>>
>>> On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
>>>> Agreed Cheryl!
>>>> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump
>>> it
>>>> together with some multi class.
>>>>
>>>> 73
>>>> Jim W7RY
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Don and all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough,
>>> but
>>>>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>>>>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors
>>> start
>>>>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It
>>> really
>>>>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but
>> no
>>>>> immediate contacts are made.
>>>>>
>>>>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in
>> the
>>>>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>>>>
>>>>> 73,
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>>>>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
Absolutely on the nail, Joe.

Let's keep it clear. If someone is cheating in a contest, in any way,
regardless of how many radios they have or what colour shirt they wear,
report them to the contest managers. The contest organisers made the rules
which are being broken. They can take action.

In any contest there will always be someone with a bigger amp, more radios,
stacked monobanders etc. They still need to be highly skilled operators; my
amateur radio licence was issued on the basis that it was for my
self-training and I am still learning after ** years! Now what's the best
time for 3C0 on 40 ....................

Cheers,

John GW4SKA




----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 9:13 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating


>
>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
> stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
> On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
>> Agreed Cheryl!
>> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump
>> it
>> together with some multi class.
>>
>> 73
>> Jim W7RY
>>
>>
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Don and all,
>>>
>>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough,
>>> but
>>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors
>>> start
>>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It
>>> really
>>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but
>>> no
>>> immediate contacts are made.
>>>
>>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in
>>> the
>>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
There is no way a Single Op, with a Single transmitter should be up
against SO2R.

Sure someone can come up with a blackbox to keep only one signal on air
at any given time,
but still you have the distinct adavantages of two separate radios.


Time to let them be in their own class.

Mike, WB9B

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. "There is no way that someone with a trap vertical and a low wire
should be up against those with stacks of monobanders on multiple
towers. The station with multiple monoband stacks has an advantage
that no level of skill can overcome.

Time to let them be in their own class."

That sounds just about as silly to me as separate classes for those
with more than one transceiver.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 5:49 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
> There is no way a Single Op, with a Single transmitter should be up
> against SO2R.
>
> Sure someone can come up with a blackbox to keep only one signal on air
> at any given time,
> but still you have the distinct adavantages of two separate radios.
>
>
> Time to let them be in their own class.
>
> Mike, WB9B
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Just a joke friends.

If the station using "stacks of monobanders on multiple Towers" is running
QRP and the station using "trap vertical and a low wire" is running 15KW
they might be able to out score.

73 ES CUL
__________________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Joe,

If you can sit there and honestly tell this group that an SO2R station
does not have a distinct advantage, Fine.

Then you would have no objection to a Single Operator, Single
Transmitter Rule.

Certainly would even out the field, And since there is no advantage to
be had by having two radios....


The distinctions between a SO1R and SO2R are of the same types that
cause other sports to create brackets, classes, and power rankings.
Its done to allow a fair and reasonable competitive contest for all
competitors.
There will be operators who will find an advantage one way or another.
Having the Varsity squad play the Pro Team shouldn't be one of them.


Mike WB9B


_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.

Don and all,

Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
immediate contacts are made.

As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?

73,

Cheryl, AA4YL
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. On Jun 14, 2010, at 6/14 9:16 AM, DickT-W0RAA wrote:

> The mood seems to be "To hell with the rules. As long
> as I can do it and don't get caught, I will."

If I were Don, I would quietly report the call sign to the contest
sponsors. The log checker (didn't Eddie use to jokingly call them log
chequers? :-) may be able to legitimately nit pick his log to death
even if they couldn't get him for the one signal at a time rule
infraction.

If this person has such a big ego that he feels compelled to cheat,
not winning one of top spots in a contest will probably be just as
devastating as being turned into a check log. For such a short
sprint, losing just a couple of QSOs could matter.

Remember that Al Capone was not put away for murder, but instead for
tax evasion.

73
Chen, W7AY

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Agreed Cheryl!
I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
together with some multi class.

73
Jim W7RY




> Don and all,
>
> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
> immediate contacts are made.
>
> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>
> 73,
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> lump it together with some multi class.

No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.

There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
stations.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
> Agreed Cheryl!
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
> together with some multi class.
>
> 73
> Jim W7RY
>
>
>
>
>> Don and all,
>>
>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
>> immediate contacts are made.
>>
>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL




>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
> stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
Geez -- could we just skip the annual multi-hundred message SO2R debate?

-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Cheryl Whitlock
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 15:20
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL



_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,

You do have a delete key on your keyboard, right?



> wrote:
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. That's correct they're switching back and forth quickly enough
that there is no "down time" on either frequency. A LEGAL SO2R
operator will still not transmit on both frequencies at the same
time but that doesn't mean he can't transmit on one and be
copying a station on the other.

Still, it's nothing more than rapid band switching as long as
one has the skill and hardware to make it work.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 4:19 PM, Cheryl Whitlock wrote:
> I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
> other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
> try, I will get told the frequency is in use.
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
>
>
>
>
>>
>> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
>> > lump it together with some multi class.
>>
>> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
>> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
>> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
>> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
>> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>>
>> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
>> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
>> stations.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
There is no contest that has a "multi-transmitter" class for
single operators. Even for multi-operator classes the class
is based on the number of simultaneous SIGNALS not the number
of transmitters in the station.

Keep the discussion productions - stop the class warfare.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 5:05 PM, James Colville wrote:
>
>>
>> Marty,
>>
>> Like you I'm tired of the semi-annual attack on SO2R operators and
>> those who use every alleged instance of cheating as a pretense to
>> attack SO2R.
>>
>> > A single op operating one station cannot compete with another
>> > single op who possess the skill and hardware to operate two
>> > stations almost simo.
>>
>> And the answer to that is "so what?" Nowhere else in amateur
>> radio do we separate operators by skill levels, antenna size,
>> transceiver sensitivity, number of receivers, or any number
>> of other parameters.
>>
>> ## On the contrary.
> ## We put those folks in the multi transmitter class.
>
>
>
>> Keep the discussion productive and address cheating - stop using
>> the cheating problem as a pretense to engage in the amateur
>> equivalent of class warfare.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>> On 6/14/2010 4:23 PM, Martin Bluhm wrote:
>>> Sorry Joe, but have to disagree with you on this one up to a point. On
>> the
>>> cheating angle, I have to agree.
>>> This horse was ridden very hard and hung up soaking wet a few months
>> back.
>>> My feelings towards SO2R have not changed; although
>>> Like I say in the terms of cheating, I go along with you. Not opening the
>>> former thread again, it comes down to a competitive nature,
>>> Where the SO2R ops should be in a class by themselves. They are very
>> skilled
>>> and my hats off to them for doing what they do. A single op operating one
>>> station cannot compete with another single op who possess the skill and
>>> hardware to operate two stations almost simo. The numbers do not add up.
>>> Let them compete with each other. That is the only way.
>>>
>>> Enough said, back into the woodwork.
>>> 73
>>> Marty
>>> W8AKS
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> Behalf Of Joe Subich, W4TV
>>> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 20:13
>>> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating
>>>
>>>
>>> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
>>> > lump it together with some multi class.
>>>
>>> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
>>> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
>>> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
>>> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
>>> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>>>
>>> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
>>> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
>>> stations.
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>>
>>> On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
>>>> Agreed Cheryl!
>>>> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump
>>> it
>>>> together with some multi class.
>>>>
>>>> 73
>>>> Jim W7RY
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Don and all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough,
>>> but
>>>>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>>>>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors
>>> start
>>>>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It
>>> really
>>>>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but
>> no
>>>>> immediate contacts are made.
>>>>>
>>>>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in
>> the
>>>>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>>>>
>>>>> 73,
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>>>>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
Absolutely on the nail, Joe.

Let's keep it clear. If someone is cheating in a contest, in any way,
regardless of how many radios they have or what colour shirt they wear,
report them to the contest managers. The contest organisers made the rules
which are being broken. They can take action.

In any contest there will always be someone with a bigger amp, more radios,
stacked monobanders etc. They still need to be highly skilled operators; my
amateur radio licence was issued on the basis that it was for my
self-training and I am still learning after ** years! Now what's the best
time for 3C0 on 40 ....................

Cheers,

John GW4SKA




----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 9:13 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating


>
>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
> stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
> On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
>> Agreed Cheryl!
>> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump
>> it
>> together with some multi class.
>>
>> 73
>> Jim W7RY
>>
>>
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Don and all,
>>>
>>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough,
>>> but
>>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors
>>> start
>>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It
>>> really
>>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but
>>> no
>>> immediate contacts are made.
>>>
>>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in
>>> the
>>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
There is no way a Single Op, with a Single transmitter should be up
against SO2R.

Sure someone can come up with a blackbox to keep only one signal on air
at any given time,
but still you have the distinct adavantages of two separate radios.


Time to let them be in their own class.

Mike, WB9B

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. "There is no way that someone with a trap vertical and a low wire
should be up against those with stacks of monobanders on multiple
towers. The station with multiple monoband stacks has an advantage
that no level of skill can overcome.

Time to let them be in their own class."

That sounds just about as silly to me as separate classes for those
with more than one transceiver.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 5:49 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
> There is no way a Single Op, with a Single transmitter should be up
> against SO2R.
>
> Sure someone can come up with a blackbox to keep only one signal on air
> at any given time,
> but still you have the distinct adavantages of two separate radios.
>
>
> Time to let them be in their own class.
>
> Mike, WB9B
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Just a joke friends.

If the station using "stacks of monobanders on multiple Towers" is running
QRP and the station using "trap vertical and a low wire" is running 15KW
they might be able to out score.

73 ES CUL
__________________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Joe,

If you can sit there and honestly tell this group that an SO2R station
does not have a distinct advantage, Fine.

Then you would have no objection to a Single Operator, Single
Transmitter Rule.

Certainly would even out the field, And since there is no advantage to
be had by having two radios....


The distinctions between a SO1R and SO2R are of the same types that
cause other sports to create brackets, classes, and power rankings.
Its done to allow a fair and reasonable competitive contest for all
competitors.
There will be operators who will find an advantage one way or another.
Having the Varsity squad play the Pro Team shouldn't be one of them.


Mike WB9B


_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Not all SO2 ops do this and there are lots of frequencies especially on CW.


CC Packet Cluster W0MU-1
W0MU.NET or 67.40.148.194

"A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may
never get over." Ben Franklin



-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Cheryl Whitlock
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 2:20 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL




>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that
> legally there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill
> (and ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report
> him/her to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in
> their stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.

Don and all,

Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
immediate contacts are made.

As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?

73,

Cheryl, AA4YL
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. On Jun 14, 2010, at 6/14 9:16 AM, DickT-W0RAA wrote:

> The mood seems to be "To hell with the rules. As long
> as I can do it and don't get caught, I will."

If I were Don, I would quietly report the call sign to the contest
sponsors. The log checker (didn't Eddie use to jokingly call them log
chequers? :-) may be able to legitimately nit pick his log to death
even if they couldn't get him for the one signal at a time rule
infraction.

If this person has such a big ego that he feels compelled to cheat,
not winning one of top spots in a contest will probably be just as
devastating as being turned into a check log. For such a short
sprint, losing just a couple of QSOs could matter.

Remember that Al Capone was not put away for murder, but instead for
tax evasion.

73
Chen, W7AY

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Agreed Cheryl!
I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
together with some multi class.

73
Jim W7RY




> Don and all,
>
> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
> immediate contacts are made.
>
> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>
> 73,
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> lump it together with some multi class.

No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.

There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
stations.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
> Agreed Cheryl!
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
> together with some multi class.
>
> 73
> Jim W7RY
>
>
>
>
>> Don and all,
>>
>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
>> immediate contacts are made.
>>
>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL




>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
> stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
Geez -- could we just skip the annual multi-hundred message SO2R debate?

-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Cheryl Whitlock
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 15:20
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL



_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,

You do have a delete key on your keyboard, right?



> wrote:
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. That's correct they're switching back and forth quickly enough
that there is no "down time" on either frequency. A LEGAL SO2R
operator will still not transmit on both frequencies at the same
time but that doesn't mean he can't transmit on one and be
copying a station on the other.

Still, it's nothing more than rapid band switching as long as
one has the skill and hardware to make it work.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 4:19 PM, Cheryl Whitlock wrote:
> I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
> other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
> try, I will get told the frequency is in use.
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
>
>
>
>
>>
>> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
>> > lump it together with some multi class.
>>
>> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
>> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
>> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
>> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
>> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>>
>> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
>> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
>> stations.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
There is no contest that has a "multi-transmitter" class for
single operators. Even for multi-operator classes the class
is based on the number of simultaneous SIGNALS not the number
of transmitters in the station.

Keep the discussion productions - stop the class warfare.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 5:05 PM, James Colville wrote:
>
>>
>> Marty,
>>
>> Like you I'm tired of the semi-annual attack on SO2R operators and
>> those who use every alleged instance of cheating as a pretense to
>> attack SO2R.
>>
>> > A single op operating one station cannot compete with another
>> > single op who possess the skill and hardware to operate two
>> > stations almost simo.
>>
>> And the answer to that is "so what?" Nowhere else in amateur
>> radio do we separate operators by skill levels, antenna size,
>> transceiver sensitivity, number of receivers, or any number
>> of other parameters.
>>
>> ## On the contrary.
> ## We put those folks in the multi transmitter class.
>
>
>
>> Keep the discussion productive and address cheating - stop using
>> the cheating problem as a pretense to engage in the amateur
>> equivalent of class warfare.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>> On 6/14/2010 4:23 PM, Martin Bluhm wrote:
>>> Sorry Joe, but have to disagree with you on this one up to a point. On
>> the
>>> cheating angle, I have to agree.
>>> This horse was ridden very hard and hung up soaking wet a few months
>> back.
>>> My feelings towards SO2R have not changed; although
>>> Like I say in the terms of cheating, I go along with you. Not opening the
>>> former thread again, it comes down to a competitive nature,
>>> Where the SO2R ops should be in a class by themselves. They are very
>> skilled
>>> and my hats off to them for doing what they do. A single op operating one
>>> station cannot compete with another single op who possess the skill and
>>> hardware to operate two stations almost simo. The numbers do not add up.
>>> Let them compete with each other. That is the only way.
>>>
>>> Enough said, back into the woodwork.
>>> 73
>>> Marty
>>> W8AKS
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> Behalf Of Joe Subich, W4TV
>>> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 20:13
>>> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating
>>>
>>>
>>> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
>>> > lump it together with some multi class.
>>>
>>> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
>>> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
>>> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
>>> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
>>> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>>>
>>> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
>>> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
>>> stations.
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>>
>>> On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
>>>> Agreed Cheryl!
>>>> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump
>>> it
>>>> together with some multi class.
>>>>
>>>> 73
>>>> Jim W7RY
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Don and all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough,
>>> but
>>>>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>>>>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors
>>> start
>>>>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It
>>> really
>>>>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but
>> no
>>>>> immediate contacts are made.
>>>>>
>>>>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in
>> the
>>>>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>>>>
>>>>> 73,
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>>>>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
Absolutely on the nail, Joe.

Let's keep it clear. If someone is cheating in a contest, in any way,
regardless of how many radios they have or what colour shirt they wear,
report them to the contest managers. The contest organisers made the rules
which are being broken. They can take action.

In any contest there will always be someone with a bigger amp, more radios,
stacked monobanders etc. They still need to be highly skilled operators; my
amateur radio licence was issued on the basis that it was for my
self-training and I am still learning after ** years! Now what's the best
time for 3C0 on 40 ....................

Cheers,

John GW4SKA




----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 9:13 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating


>
>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
> stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
> On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
>> Agreed Cheryl!
>> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump
>> it
>> together with some multi class.
>>
>> 73
>> Jim W7RY
>>
>>
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Don and all,
>>>
>>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough,
>>> but
>>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors
>>> start
>>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It
>>> really
>>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but
>>> no
>>> immediate contacts are made.
>>>
>>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in
>>> the
>>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
There is no way a Single Op, with a Single transmitter should be up
against SO2R.

Sure someone can come up with a blackbox to keep only one signal on air
at any given time,
but still you have the distinct adavantages of two separate radios.


Time to let them be in their own class.

Mike, WB9B

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. "There is no way that someone with a trap vertical and a low wire
should be up against those with stacks of monobanders on multiple
towers. The station with multiple monoband stacks has an advantage
that no level of skill can overcome.

Time to let them be in their own class."

That sounds just about as silly to me as separate classes for those
with more than one transceiver.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 5:49 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
> There is no way a Single Op, with a Single transmitter should be up
> against SO2R.
>
> Sure someone can come up with a blackbox to keep only one signal on air
> at any given time,
> but still you have the distinct adavantages of two separate radios.
>
>
> Time to let them be in their own class.
>
> Mike, WB9B
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Just a joke friends.

If the station using "stacks of monobanders on multiple Towers" is running
QRP and the station using "trap vertical and a low wire" is running 15KW
they might be able to out score.

73 ES CUL
__________________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Joe,

If you can sit there and honestly tell this group that an SO2R station
does not have a distinct advantage, Fine.

Then you would have no objection to a Single Operator, Single
Transmitter Rule.

Certainly would even out the field, And since there is no advantage to
be had by having two radios....


The distinctions between a SO1R and SO2R are of the same types that
cause other sports to create brackets, classes, and power rankings.
Its done to allow a fair and reasonable competitive contest for all
competitors.
There will be operators who will find an advantage one way or another.
Having the Varsity squad play the Pro Team shouldn't be one of them.


Mike WB9B


_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Not all SO2 ops do this and there are lots of frequencies especially on CW.


CC Packet Cluster W0MU-1
W0MU.NET or 67.40.148.194

"A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may
never get over." Ben Franklin



-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Cheryl Whitlock
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 2:20 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL




>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that
> legally there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill
> (and ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report
> him/her to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in
> their stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
> If you can sit there and honestly tell this group that an SO2R station
> does not have a distinct advantage, Fine.

I'm not saying that it is not an advantage although there are single
radio stations that regularly outscore two radio stations. A big
part of the difference is still operator skill - a skilled operator
can do more if he/she has more resources whether those resources be
antennas, transmitters, receivers, or computers. In the end it is
still HOW the operator uses those resources.

What I am saying is that Radiosport has consistently based entry
classification not on the number of transmitters, the use of computers,
or the number/size of antennas but by whether ONE PERSON performed all
of the operating functions (e.g. single operator) or more than one
person was involved (e.g., multi-operator).

> There will be operators who will find an advantage one way or another.
> Having the Varsity squad play the Pro Team shouldn't be one of them.

We're not talking about "teams" here - that would be multi-operator.

Unlike auto racing or yachting, etc. radiosport does not define class
based on hardware. Similarly, unlike golf or bowling radiosport does
not define classes based on experience, age or "handicap."

If you want to define competition based on a system of classes - first
define the classes starting with antennas and experience. Since a
single operator may transmit only one signal at a time and may listen
to as many receivers as he can reasonably handle, the number of
available transmitters (and the speed with which one can switch bands)
should be one of the LAST things considered in defining "classes of
competition."

Understand, if you choose to redefine radiosport in an auto racing or
golf model, you are exponentially increasing the cost and effort
required of contest sponsors (based on the larger number of "classes"
and the increased opportunity for cheating and thus the increased need
for policing). There are many contest sponsors who will simply stop
sponsoring their events rather than deal with the added cost and
effort. As such, a wholesale restructuring of radiosport will probably
kill it (but then maybe you're an anti-contester who *WANTS* to destroy
radiosport).

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 7:10 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
> Joe,
>
> If you can sit there and honestly tell this group that an SO2R station
> does not have a distinct advantage, Fine.
>
> Then you would have no objection to a Single Operator, Single
> Transmitter Rule.
>
> Certainly would even out the field, And since there is no advantage to
> be had by having two radios....
>
>
> The distinctions between a SO1R and SO2R are of the same types that
> cause other sports to create brackets, classes, and power rankings.
> Its done to allow a fair and reasonable competitive contest for all
> competitors.
> There will be operators who will find an advantage one way or another.
> Having the Varsity squad play the Pro Team shouldn't be one of them.
>
>
> Mike WB9B
>
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.

Don and all,

Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
immediate contacts are made.

As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?

73,

Cheryl, AA4YL
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. On Jun 14, 2010, at 6/14 9:16 AM, DickT-W0RAA wrote:

> The mood seems to be "To hell with the rules. As long
> as I can do it and don't get caught, I will."

If I were Don, I would quietly report the call sign to the contest
sponsors. The log checker (didn't Eddie use to jokingly call them log
chequers? :-) may be able to legitimately nit pick his log to death
even if they couldn't get him for the one signal at a time rule
infraction.

If this person has such a big ego that he feels compelled to cheat,
not winning one of top spots in a contest will probably be just as
devastating as being turned into a check log. For such a short
sprint, losing just a couple of QSOs could matter.

Remember that Al Capone was not put away for murder, but instead for
tax evasion.

73
Chen, W7AY

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Agreed Cheryl!
I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
together with some multi class.

73
Jim W7RY




> Don and all,
>
> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
> immediate contacts are made.
>
> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>
> 73,
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> lump it together with some multi class.

No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.

There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
stations.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
> Agreed Cheryl!
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
> together with some multi class.
>
> 73
> Jim W7RY
>
>
>
>
>> Don and all,
>>
>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
>> immediate contacts are made.
>>
>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL




>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
> stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
Geez -- could we just skip the annual multi-hundred message SO2R debate?

-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Cheryl Whitlock
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 15:20
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL



_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,

You do have a delete key on your keyboard, right?



> wrote:
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. That's correct they're switching back and forth quickly enough
that there is no "down time" on either frequency. A LEGAL SO2R
operator will still not transmit on both frequencies at the same
time but that doesn't mean he can't transmit on one and be
copying a station on the other.

Still, it's nothing more than rapid band switching as long as
one has the skill and hardware to make it work.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 4:19 PM, Cheryl Whitlock wrote:
> I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
> other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
> try, I will get told the frequency is in use.
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
>
>
>
>
>>
>> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
>> > lump it together with some multi class.
>>
>> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
>> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
>> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
>> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
>> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>>
>> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
>> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
>> stations.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
There is no contest that has a "multi-transmitter" class for
single operators. Even for multi-operator classes the class
is based on the number of simultaneous SIGNALS not the number
of transmitters in the station.

Keep the discussion productions - stop the class warfare.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 5:05 PM, James Colville wrote:
>
>>
>> Marty,
>>
>> Like you I'm tired of the semi-annual attack on SO2R operators and
>> those who use every alleged instance of cheating as a pretense to
>> attack SO2R.
>>
>> > A single op operating one station cannot compete with another
>> > single op who possess the skill and hardware to operate two
>> > stations almost simo.
>>
>> And the answer to that is "so what?" Nowhere else in amateur
>> radio do we separate operators by skill levels, antenna size,
>> transceiver sensitivity, number of receivers, or any number
>> of other parameters.
>>
>> ## On the contrary.
> ## We put those folks in the multi transmitter class.
>
>
>
>> Keep the discussion productive and address cheating - stop using
>> the cheating problem as a pretense to engage in the amateur
>> equivalent of class warfare.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>> On 6/14/2010 4:23 PM, Martin Bluhm wrote:
>>> Sorry Joe, but have to disagree with you on this one up to a point. On
>> the
>>> cheating angle, I have to agree.
>>> This horse was ridden very hard and hung up soaking wet a few months
>> back.
>>> My feelings towards SO2R have not changed; although
>>> Like I say in the terms of cheating, I go along with you. Not opening the
>>> former thread again, it comes down to a competitive nature,
>>> Where the SO2R ops should be in a class by themselves. They are very
>> skilled
>>> and my hats off to them for doing what they do. A single op operating one
>>> station cannot compete with another single op who possess the skill and
>>> hardware to operate two stations almost simo. The numbers do not add up.
>>> Let them compete with each other. That is the only way.
>>>
>>> Enough said, back into the woodwork.
>>> 73
>>> Marty
>>> W8AKS
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> Behalf Of Joe Subich, W4TV
>>> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 20:13
>>> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating
>>>
>>>
>>> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
>>> > lump it together with some multi class.
>>>
>>> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
>>> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
>>> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
>>> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
>>> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>>>
>>> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
>>> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
>>> stations.
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>>
>>> On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
>>>> Agreed Cheryl!
>>>> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump
>>> it
>>>> together with some multi class.
>>>>
>>>> 73
>>>> Jim W7RY
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Don and all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough,
>>> but
>>>>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>>>>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors
>>> start
>>>>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It
>>> really
>>>>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but
>> no
>>>>> immediate contacts are made.
>>>>>
>>>>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in
>> the
>>>>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>>>>
>>>>> 73,
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>>>>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
Absolutely on the nail, Joe.

Let's keep it clear. If someone is cheating in a contest, in any way,
regardless of how many radios they have or what colour shirt they wear,
report them to the contest managers. The contest organisers made the rules
which are being broken. They can take action.

In any contest there will always be someone with a bigger amp, more radios,
stacked monobanders etc. They still need to be highly skilled operators; my
amateur radio licence was issued on the basis that it was for my
self-training and I am still learning after ** years! Now what's the best
time for 3C0 on 40 ....................

Cheers,

John GW4SKA




----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 9:13 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating


>
>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
> stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
> On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
>> Agreed Cheryl!
>> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump
>> it
>> together with some multi class.
>>
>> 73
>> Jim W7RY
>>
>>
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Don and all,
>>>
>>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough,
>>> but
>>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors
>>> start
>>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It
>>> really
>>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but
>>> no
>>> immediate contacts are made.
>>>
>>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in
>>> the
>>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
There is no way a Single Op, with a Single transmitter should be up
against SO2R.

Sure someone can come up with a blackbox to keep only one signal on air
at any given time,
but still you have the distinct adavantages of two separate radios.


Time to let them be in their own class.

Mike, WB9B

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. "There is no way that someone with a trap vertical and a low wire
should be up against those with stacks of monobanders on multiple
towers. The station with multiple monoband stacks has an advantage
that no level of skill can overcome.

Time to let them be in their own class."

That sounds just about as silly to me as separate classes for those
with more than one transceiver.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 5:49 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
> There is no way a Single Op, with a Single transmitter should be up
> against SO2R.
>
> Sure someone can come up with a blackbox to keep only one signal on air
> at any given time,
> but still you have the distinct adavantages of two separate radios.
>
>
> Time to let them be in their own class.
>
> Mike, WB9B
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Just a joke friends.

If the station using "stacks of monobanders on multiple Towers" is running
QRP and the station using "trap vertical and a low wire" is running 15KW
they might be able to out score.

73 ES CUL
__________________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Joe,

If you can sit there and honestly tell this group that an SO2R station
does not have a distinct advantage, Fine.

Then you would have no objection to a Single Operator, Single
Transmitter Rule.

Certainly would even out the field, And since there is no advantage to
be had by having two radios....


The distinctions between a SO1R and SO2R are of the same types that
cause other sports to create brackets, classes, and power rankings.
Its done to allow a fair and reasonable competitive contest for all
competitors.
There will be operators who will find an advantage one way or another.
Having the Varsity squad play the Pro Team shouldn't be one of them.


Mike WB9B


_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Not all SO2 ops do this and there are lots of frequencies especially on CW.


CC Packet Cluster W0MU-1
W0MU.NET or 67.40.148.194

"A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may
never get over." Ben Franklin



-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Cheryl Whitlock
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 2:20 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL




>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that
> legally there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill
> (and ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report
> him/her to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in
> their stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
> If you can sit there and honestly tell this group that an SO2R station
> does not have a distinct advantage, Fine.

I'm not saying that it is not an advantage although there are single
radio stations that regularly outscore two radio stations. A big
part of the difference is still operator skill - a skilled operator
can do more if he/she has more resources whether those resources be
antennas, transmitters, receivers, or computers. In the end it is
still HOW the operator uses those resources.

What I am saying is that Radiosport has consistently based entry
classification not on the number of transmitters, the use of computers,
or the number/size of antennas but by whether ONE PERSON performed all
of the operating functions (e.g. single operator) or more than one
person was involved (e.g., multi-operator).

> There will be operators who will find an advantage one way or another.
> Having the Varsity squad play the Pro Team shouldn't be one of them.

We're not talking about "teams" here - that would be multi-operator.

Unlike auto racing or yachting, etc. radiosport does not define class
based on hardware. Similarly, unlike golf or bowling radiosport does
not define classes based on experience, age or "handicap."

If you want to define competition based on a system of classes - first
define the classes starting with antennas and experience. Since a
single operator may transmit only one signal at a time and may listen
to as many receivers as he can reasonably handle, the number of
available transmitters (and the speed with which one can switch bands)
should be one of the LAST things considered in defining "classes of
competition."

Understand, if you choose to redefine radiosport in an auto racing or
golf model, you are exponentially increasing the cost and effort
required of contest sponsors (based on the larger number of "classes"
and the increased opportunity for cheating and thus the increased need
for policing). There are many contest sponsors who will simply stop
sponsoring their events rather than deal with the added cost and
effort. As such, a wholesale restructuring of radiosport will probably
kill it (but then maybe you're an anti-contester who *WANTS* to destroy
radiosport).

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 7:10 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
> Joe,
>
> If you can sit there and honestly tell this group that an SO2R station
> does not have a distinct advantage, Fine.
>
> Then you would have no objection to a Single Operator, Single
> Transmitter Rule.
>
> Certainly would even out the field, And since there is no advantage to
> be had by having two radios....
>
>
> The distinctions between a SO1R and SO2R are of the same types that
> cause other sports to create brackets, classes, and power rankings.
> Its done to allow a fair and reasonable competitive contest for all
> competitors.
> There will be operators who will find an advantage one way or another.
> Having the Varsity squad play the Pro Team shouldn't be one of them.
>
>
> Mike WB9B
>
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Where do you draw the line? My radio has two separate receivers and two
vfo's. One radio. I can change bands very fast if I want. So you want to
classify every piece of gear on someones shack?


CC Packet Cluster W0MU-1
W0MU.NET or 67.40.148.194

"A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may
never get over." Ben Franklin



-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Michael Haack
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 3:50 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

There is no way a Single Op, with a Single transmitter should be up against
SO2R.

Sure someone can come up with a blackbox to keep only one signal on air at
any given time, but still you have the distinct adavantages of two separate
radios.


Time to let them be in their own class.

Mike, WB9B

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.

Don and all,

Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
immediate contacts are made.

As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?

73,

Cheryl, AA4YL
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. On Jun 14, 2010, at 6/14 9:16 AM, DickT-W0RAA wrote:

> The mood seems to be "To hell with the rules. As long
> as I can do it and don't get caught, I will."

If I were Don, I would quietly report the call sign to the contest
sponsors. The log checker (didn't Eddie use to jokingly call them log
chequers? :-) may be able to legitimately nit pick his log to death
even if they couldn't get him for the one signal at a time rule
infraction.

If this person has such a big ego that he feels compelled to cheat,
not winning one of top spots in a contest will probably be just as
devastating as being turned into a check log. For such a short
sprint, losing just a couple of QSOs could matter.

Remember that Al Capone was not put away for murder, but instead for
tax evasion.

73
Chen, W7AY

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Agreed Cheryl!
I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
together with some multi class.

73
Jim W7RY




> Don and all,
>
> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
> immediate contacts are made.
>
> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>
> 73,
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> lump it together with some multi class.

No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.

There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
stations.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
> Agreed Cheryl!
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
> together with some multi class.
>
> 73
> Jim W7RY
>
>
>
>
>> Don and all,
>>
>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
>> immediate contacts are made.
>>
>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL




>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
> stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
Geez -- could we just skip the annual multi-hundred message SO2R debate?

-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Cheryl Whitlock
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 15:20
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL



_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,

You do have a delete key on your keyboard, right?



> wrote:
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. That's correct they're switching back and forth quickly enough
that there is no "down time" on either frequency. A LEGAL SO2R
operator will still not transmit on both frequencies at the same
time but that doesn't mean he can't transmit on one and be
copying a station on the other.

Still, it's nothing more than rapid band switching as long as
one has the skill and hardware to make it work.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 4:19 PM, Cheryl Whitlock wrote:
> I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
> other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
> try, I will get told the frequency is in use.
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
>
>
>
>
>>
>> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
>> > lump it together with some multi class.
>>
>> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
>> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
>> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
>> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
>> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>>
>> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
>> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
>> stations.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
There is no contest that has a "multi-transmitter" class for
single operators. Even for multi-operator classes the class
is based on the number of simultaneous SIGNALS not the number
of transmitters in the station.

Keep the discussion productions - stop the class warfare.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 5:05 PM, James Colville wrote:
>
>>
>> Marty,
>>
>> Like you I'm tired of the semi-annual attack on SO2R operators and
>> those who use every alleged instance of cheating as a pretense to
>> attack SO2R.
>>
>> > A single op operating one station cannot compete with another
>> > single op who possess the skill and hardware to operate two
>> > stations almost simo.
>>
>> And the answer to that is "so what?" Nowhere else in amateur
>> radio do we separate operators by skill levels, antenna size,
>> transceiver sensitivity, number of receivers, or any number
>> of other parameters.
>>
>> ## On the contrary.
> ## We put those folks in the multi transmitter class.
>
>
>
>> Keep the discussion productive and address cheating - stop using
>> the cheating problem as a pretense to engage in the amateur
>> equivalent of class warfare.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>> On 6/14/2010 4:23 PM, Martin Bluhm wrote:
>>> Sorry Joe, but have to disagree with you on this one up to a point. On
>> the
>>> cheating angle, I have to agree.
>>> This horse was ridden very hard and hung up soaking wet a few months
>> back.
>>> My feelings towards SO2R have not changed; although
>>> Like I say in the terms of cheating, I go along with you. Not opening the
>>> former thread again, it comes down to a competitive nature,
>>> Where the SO2R ops should be in a class by themselves. They are very
>> skilled
>>> and my hats off to them for doing what they do. A single op operating one
>>> station cannot compete with another single op who possess the skill and
>>> hardware to operate two stations almost simo. The numbers do not add up.
>>> Let them compete with each other. That is the only way.
>>>
>>> Enough said, back into the woodwork.
>>> 73
>>> Marty
>>> W8AKS
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> Behalf Of Joe Subich, W4TV
>>> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 20:13
>>> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating
>>>
>>>
>>> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
>>> > lump it together with some multi class.
>>>
>>> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
>>> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
>>> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
>>> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
>>> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>>>
>>> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
>>> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
>>> stations.
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>>
>>> On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
>>>> Agreed Cheryl!
>>>> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump
>>> it
>>>> together with some multi class.
>>>>
>>>> 73
>>>> Jim W7RY
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Don and all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough,
>>> but
>>>>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>>>>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors
>>> start
>>>>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It
>>> really
>>>>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but
>> no
>>>>> immediate contacts are made.
>>>>>
>>>>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in
>> the
>>>>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>>>>
>>>>> 73,
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>>>>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
Absolutely on the nail, Joe.

Let's keep it clear. If someone is cheating in a contest, in any way,
regardless of how many radios they have or what colour shirt they wear,
report them to the contest managers. The contest organisers made the rules
which are being broken. They can take action.

In any contest there will always be someone with a bigger amp, more radios,
stacked monobanders etc. They still need to be highly skilled operators; my
amateur radio licence was issued on the basis that it was for my
self-training and I am still learning after ** years! Now what's the best
time for 3C0 on 40 ....................

Cheers,

John GW4SKA




----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 9:13 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating


>
>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
> stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
> On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
>> Agreed Cheryl!
>> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump
>> it
>> together with some multi class.
>>
>> 73
>> Jim W7RY
>>
>>
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Don and all,
>>>
>>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough,
>>> but
>>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors
>>> start
>>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It
>>> really
>>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but
>>> no
>>> immediate contacts are made.
>>>
>>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in
>>> the
>>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
There is no way a Single Op, with a Single transmitter should be up
against SO2R.

Sure someone can come up with a blackbox to keep only one signal on air
at any given time,
but still you have the distinct adavantages of two separate radios.


Time to let them be in their own class.

Mike, WB9B

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. "There is no way that someone with a trap vertical and a low wire
should be up against those with stacks of monobanders on multiple
towers. The station with multiple monoband stacks has an advantage
that no level of skill can overcome.

Time to let them be in their own class."

That sounds just about as silly to me as separate classes for those
with more than one transceiver.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 5:49 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
> There is no way a Single Op, with a Single transmitter should be up
> against SO2R.
>
> Sure someone can come up with a blackbox to keep only one signal on air
> at any given time,
> but still you have the distinct adavantages of two separate radios.
>
>
> Time to let them be in their own class.
>
> Mike, WB9B
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Just a joke friends.

If the station using "stacks of monobanders on multiple Towers" is running
QRP and the station using "trap vertical and a low wire" is running 15KW
they might be able to out score.

73 ES CUL
__________________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Joe,

If you can sit there and honestly tell this group that an SO2R station
does not have a distinct advantage, Fine.

Then you would have no objection to a Single Operator, Single
Transmitter Rule.

Certainly would even out the field, And since there is no advantage to
be had by having two radios....


The distinctions between a SO1R and SO2R are of the same types that
cause other sports to create brackets, classes, and power rankings.
Its done to allow a fair and reasonable competitive contest for all
competitors.
There will be operators who will find an advantage one way or another.
Having the Varsity squad play the Pro Team shouldn't be one of them.


Mike WB9B


_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Not all SO2 ops do this and there are lots of frequencies especially on CW.


CC Packet Cluster W0MU-1
W0MU.NET or 67.40.148.194

"A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may
never get over." Ben Franklin



-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Cheryl Whitlock
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 2:20 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL




>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that
> legally there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill
> (and ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report
> him/her to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in
> their stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
> If you can sit there and honestly tell this group that an SO2R station
> does not have a distinct advantage, Fine.

I'm not saying that it is not an advantage although there are single
radio stations that regularly outscore two radio stations. A big
part of the difference is still operator skill - a skilled operator
can do more if he/she has more resources whether those resources be
antennas, transmitters, receivers, or computers. In the end it is
still HOW the operator uses those resources.

What I am saying is that Radiosport has consistently based entry
classification not on the number of transmitters, the use of computers,
or the number/size of antennas but by whether ONE PERSON performed all
of the operating functions (e.g. single operator) or more than one
person was involved (e.g., multi-operator).

> There will be operators who will find an advantage one way or another.
> Having the Varsity squad play the Pro Team shouldn't be one of them.

We're not talking about "teams" here - that would be multi-operator.

Unlike auto racing or yachting, etc. radiosport does not define class
based on hardware. Similarly, unlike golf or bowling radiosport does
not define classes based on experience, age or "handicap."

If you want to define competition based on a system of classes - first
define the classes starting with antennas and experience. Since a
single operator may transmit only one signal at a time and may listen
to as many receivers as he can reasonably handle, the number of
available transmitters (and the speed with which one can switch bands)
should be one of the LAST things considered in defining "classes of
competition."

Understand, if you choose to redefine radiosport in an auto racing or
golf model, you are exponentially increasing the cost and effort
required of contest sponsors (based on the larger number of "classes"
and the increased opportunity for cheating and thus the increased need
for policing). There are many contest sponsors who will simply stop
sponsoring their events rather than deal with the added cost and
effort. As such, a wholesale restructuring of radiosport will probably
kill it (but then maybe you're an anti-contester who *WANTS* to destroy
radiosport).

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 7:10 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
> Joe,
>
> If you can sit there and honestly tell this group that an SO2R station
> does not have a distinct advantage, Fine.
>
> Then you would have no objection to a Single Operator, Single
> Transmitter Rule.
>
> Certainly would even out the field, And since there is no advantage to
> be had by having two radios....
>
>
> The distinctions between a SO1R and SO2R are of the same types that
> cause other sports to create brackets, classes, and power rankings.
> Its done to allow a fair and reasonable competitive contest for all
> competitors.
> There will be operators who will find an advantage one way or another.
> Having the Varsity squad play the Pro Team shouldn't be one of them.
>
>
> Mike WB9B
>
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Where do you draw the line? My radio has two separate receivers and two
vfo's. One radio. I can change bands very fast if I want. So you want to
classify every piece of gear on someones shack?


CC Packet Cluster W0MU-1
W0MU.NET or 67.40.148.194

"A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may
never get over." Ben Franklin



-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Michael Haack
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 3:50 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

There is no way a Single Op, with a Single transmitter should be up against
SO2R.

Sure someone can come up with a blackbox to keep only one signal on air at
any given time, but still you have the distinct adavantages of two separate
radios.


Time to let them be in their own class.

Mike, WB9B

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. A great op using SO2R probably has an advantage. So do ops with 200 ft
towers, big amps, 11k rigs, hardline, stacks etc.

What I hear is a bunch of people that do not want to change and embrace
something that would make them better scores.

So I guess operators should be judged and put in their own categories
because they are better than you? Really?


CC Packet Cluster W0MU-1
W0MU.NET or 67.40.148.194

"A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may
never get over." Ben Franklin



-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Michael Haack
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 5:11 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating

Joe,

If you can sit there and honestly tell this group that an SO2R station does
not have a distinct advantage, Fine.

Then you would have no objection to a Single Operator, Single Transmitter
Rule.

Certainly would even out the field, And since there is no advantage to be
had by having two radios....


The distinctions between a SO1R and SO2R are of the same types that
cause other sports to create brackets, classes, and power rankings.
Its done to allow a fair and reasonable competitive contest for all
competitors.
There will be operators who will find an advantage one way or another.
Having the Varsity squad play the Pro Team shouldn't be one of them.


Mike WB9B


_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.

Don and all,

Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
immediate contacts are made.

As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?

73,

Cheryl, AA4YL
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. On Jun 14, 2010, at 6/14 9:16 AM, DickT-W0RAA wrote:

> The mood seems to be "To hell with the rules. As long
> as I can do it and don't get caught, I will."

If I were Don, I would quietly report the call sign to the contest
sponsors. The log checker (didn't Eddie use to jokingly call them log
chequers? :-) may be able to legitimately nit pick his log to death
even if they couldn't get him for the one signal at a time rule
infraction.

If this person has such a big ego that he feels compelled to cheat,
not winning one of top spots in a contest will probably be just as
devastating as being turned into a check log. For such a short
sprint, losing just a couple of QSOs could matter.

Remember that Al Capone was not put away for murder, but instead for
tax evasion.

73
Chen, W7AY

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Agreed Cheryl!
I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
together with some multi class.

73
Jim W7RY




> Don and all,
>
> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
> immediate contacts are made.
>
> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>
> 73,
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> lump it together with some multi class.

No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.

There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
stations.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
> Agreed Cheryl!
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
> together with some multi class.
>
> 73
> Jim W7RY
>
>
>
>
>> Don and all,
>>
>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
>> immediate contacts are made.
>>
>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL




>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
> stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
Geez -- could we just skip the annual multi-hundred message SO2R debate?

-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Cheryl Whitlock
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 15:20
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL



_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,

You do have a delete key on your keyboard, right?



> wrote:
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. That's correct they're switching back and forth quickly enough
that there is no "down time" on either frequency. A LEGAL SO2R
operator will still not transmit on both frequencies at the same
time but that doesn't mean he can't transmit on one and be
copying a station on the other.

Still, it's nothing more than rapid band switching as long as
one has the skill and hardware to make it work.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 4:19 PM, Cheryl Whitlock wrote:
> I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
> other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
> try, I will get told the frequency is in use.
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
>
>
>
>
>>
>> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
>> > lump it together with some multi class.
>>
>> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
>> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
>> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
>> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
>> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>>
>> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
>> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
>> stations.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
There is no contest that has a "multi-transmitter" class for
single operators. Even for multi-operator classes the class
is based on the number of simultaneous SIGNALS not the number
of transmitters in the station.

Keep the discussion productions - stop the class warfare.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 5:05 PM, James Colville wrote:
>
>>
>> Marty,
>>
>> Like you I'm tired of the semi-annual attack on SO2R operators and
>> those who use every alleged instance of cheating as a pretense to
>> attack SO2R.
>>
>> > A single op operating one station cannot compete with another
>> > single op who possess the skill and hardware to operate two
>> > stations almost simo.
>>
>> And the answer to that is "so what?" Nowhere else in amateur
>> radio do we separate operators by skill levels, antenna size,
>> transceiver sensitivity, number of receivers, or any number
>> of other parameters.
>>
>> ## On the contrary.
> ## We put those folks in the multi transmitter class.
>
>
>
>> Keep the discussion productive and address cheating - stop using
>> the cheating problem as a pretense to engage in the amateur
>> equivalent of class warfare.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>> On 6/14/2010 4:23 PM, Martin Bluhm wrote:
>>> Sorry Joe, but have to disagree with you on this one up to a point. On
>> the
>>> cheating angle, I have to agree.
>>> This horse was ridden very hard and hung up soaking wet a few months
>> back.
>>> My feelings towards SO2R have not changed; although
>>> Like I say in the terms of cheating, I go along with you. Not opening the
>>> former thread again, it comes down to a competitive nature,
>>> Where the SO2R ops should be in a class by themselves. They are very
>> skilled
>>> and my hats off to them for doing what they do. A single op operating one
>>> station cannot compete with another single op who possess the skill and
>>> hardware to operate two stations almost simo. The numbers do not add up.
>>> Let them compete with each other. That is the only way.
>>>
>>> Enough said, back into the woodwork.
>>> 73
>>> Marty
>>> W8AKS
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> Behalf Of Joe Subich, W4TV
>>> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 20:13
>>> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating
>>>
>>>
>>> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
>>> > lump it together with some multi class.
>>>
>>> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
>>> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
>>> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
>>> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
>>> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>>>
>>> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
>>> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
>>> stations.
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>>
>>> On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
>>>> Agreed Cheryl!
>>>> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump
>>> it
>>>> together with some multi class.
>>>>
>>>> 73
>>>> Jim W7RY
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Don and all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough,
>>> but
>>>>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>>>>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors
>>> start
>>>>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It
>>> really
>>>>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but
>> no
>>>>> immediate contacts are made.
>>>>>
>>>>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in
>> the
>>>>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>>>>
>>>>> 73,
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>>>>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
Absolutely on the nail, Joe.

Let's keep it clear. If someone is cheating in a contest, in any way,
regardless of how many radios they have or what colour shirt they wear,
report them to the contest managers. The contest organisers made the rules
which are being broken. They can take action.

In any contest there will always be someone with a bigger amp, more radios,
stacked monobanders etc. They still need to be highly skilled operators; my
amateur radio licence was issued on the basis that it was for my
self-training and I am still learning after ** years! Now what's the best
time for 3C0 on 40 ....................

Cheers,

John GW4SKA




----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 9:13 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating


>
>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
> stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
> On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
>> Agreed Cheryl!
>> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump
>> it
>> together with some multi class.
>>
>> 73
>> Jim W7RY
>>
>>
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Don and all,
>>>
>>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough,
>>> but
>>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors
>>> start
>>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It
>>> really
>>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but
>>> no
>>> immediate contacts are made.
>>>
>>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in
>>> the
>>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
There is no way a Single Op, with a Single transmitter should be up
against SO2R.

Sure someone can come up with a blackbox to keep only one signal on air
at any given time,
but still you have the distinct adavantages of two separate radios.


Time to let them be in their own class.

Mike, WB9B

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. "There is no way that someone with a trap vertical and a low wire
should be up against those with stacks of monobanders on multiple
towers. The station with multiple monoband stacks has an advantage
that no level of skill can overcome.

Time to let them be in their own class."

That sounds just about as silly to me as separate classes for those
with more than one transceiver.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 5:49 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
> There is no way a Single Op, with a Single transmitter should be up
> against SO2R.
>
> Sure someone can come up with a blackbox to keep only one signal on air
> at any given time,
> but still you have the distinct adavantages of two separate radios.
>
>
> Time to let them be in their own class.
>
> Mike, WB9B
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Just a joke friends.

If the station using "stacks of monobanders on multiple Towers" is running
QRP and the station using "trap vertical and a low wire" is running 15KW
they might be able to out score.

73 ES CUL
__________________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Joe,

If you can sit there and honestly tell this group that an SO2R station
does not have a distinct advantage, Fine.

Then you would have no objection to a Single Operator, Single
Transmitter Rule.

Certainly would even out the field, And since there is no advantage to
be had by having two radios....


The distinctions between a SO1R and SO2R are of the same types that
cause other sports to create brackets, classes, and power rankings.
Its done to allow a fair and reasonable competitive contest for all
competitors.
There will be operators who will find an advantage one way or another.
Having the Varsity squad play the Pro Team shouldn't be one of them.


Mike WB9B


_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Not all SO2 ops do this and there are lots of frequencies especially on CW.


CC Packet Cluster W0MU-1
W0MU.NET or 67.40.148.194

"A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may
never get over." Ben Franklin



-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Cheryl Whitlock
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 2:20 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL




>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that
> legally there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill
> (and ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report
> him/her to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in
> their stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
> If you can sit there and honestly tell this group that an SO2R station
> does not have a distinct advantage, Fine.

I'm not saying that it is not an advantage although there are single
radio stations that regularly outscore two radio stations. A big
part of the difference is still operator skill - a skilled operator
can do more if he/she has more resources whether those resources be
antennas, transmitters, receivers, or computers. In the end it is
still HOW the operator uses those resources.

What I am saying is that Radiosport has consistently based entry
classification not on the number of transmitters, the use of computers,
or the number/size of antennas but by whether ONE PERSON performed all
of the operating functions (e.g. single operator) or more than one
person was involved (e.g., multi-operator).

> There will be operators who will find an advantage one way or another.
> Having the Varsity squad play the Pro Team shouldn't be one of them.

We're not talking about "teams" here - that would be multi-operator.

Unlike auto racing or yachting, etc. radiosport does not define class
based on hardware. Similarly, unlike golf or bowling radiosport does
not define classes based on experience, age or "handicap."

If you want to define competition based on a system of classes - first
define the classes starting with antennas and experience. Since a
single operator may transmit only one signal at a time and may listen
to as many receivers as he can reasonably handle, the number of
available transmitters (and the speed with which one can switch bands)
should be one of the LAST things considered in defining "classes of
competition."

Understand, if you choose to redefine radiosport in an auto racing or
golf model, you are exponentially increasing the cost and effort
required of contest sponsors (based on the larger number of "classes"
and the increased opportunity for cheating and thus the increased need
for policing). There are many contest sponsors who will simply stop
sponsoring their events rather than deal with the added cost and
effort. As such, a wholesale restructuring of radiosport will probably
kill it (but then maybe you're an anti-contester who *WANTS* to destroy
radiosport).

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 7:10 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
> Joe,
>
> If you can sit there and honestly tell this group that an SO2R station
> does not have a distinct advantage, Fine.
>
> Then you would have no objection to a Single Operator, Single
> Transmitter Rule.
>
> Certainly would even out the field, And since there is no advantage to
> be had by having two radios....
>
>
> The distinctions between a SO1R and SO2R are of the same types that
> cause other sports to create brackets, classes, and power rankings.
> Its done to allow a fair and reasonable competitive contest for all
> competitors.
> There will be operators who will find an advantage one way or another.
> Having the Varsity squad play the Pro Team shouldn't be one of them.
>
>
> Mike WB9B
>
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Where do you draw the line? My radio has two separate receivers and two
vfo's. One radio. I can change bands very fast if I want. So you want to
classify every piece of gear on someones shack?


CC Packet Cluster W0MU-1
W0MU.NET or 67.40.148.194

"A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may
never get over." Ben Franklin



-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Michael Haack
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 3:50 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

There is no way a Single Op, with a Single transmitter should be up against
SO2R.

Sure someone can come up with a blackbox to keep only one signal on air at
any given time, but still you have the distinct adavantages of two separate
radios.


Time to let them be in their own class.

Mike, WB9B

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. A great op using SO2R probably has an advantage. So do ops with 200 ft
towers, big amps, 11k rigs, hardline, stacks etc.

What I hear is a bunch of people that do not want to change and embrace
something that would make them better scores.

So I guess operators should be judged and put in their own categories
because they are better than you? Really?


CC Packet Cluster W0MU-1
W0MU.NET or 67.40.148.194

"A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may
never get over." Ben Franklin



-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Michael Haack
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 5:11 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating

Joe,

If you can sit there and honestly tell this group that an SO2R station does
not have a distinct advantage, Fine.

Then you would have no objection to a Single Operator, Single Transmitter
Rule.

Certainly would even out the field, And since there is no advantage to be
had by having two radios....


The distinctions between a SO1R and SO2R are of the same types that
cause other sports to create brackets, classes, and power rankings.
Its done to allow a fair and reasonable competitive contest for all
competitors.
There will be operators who will find an advantage one way or another.
Having the Varsity squad play the Pro Team shouldn't be one of them.


Mike WB9B


_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. I always run SO1R and while I have looked at trying to set up a SO2R station
I doubt it will ever happen. The technical challenge could eventually be
overcome, but my main problem is the lack of sufficient real estate to
support the additional antennas needed for SO2R. So I content myself with
doing the best I can each contest and besting my constant nemesis - me! Try
not to make too many bone headed mistakes like running QRO into the wrong
antenna, getting dyslexic at the keyboard and transposing the letters,
working split the wrong way, etc. My overall goal is to best my last outing
in whatever contest it is. I can't control the weather (wind here in AK),
the sun spots, the geomagnetic field, and the XYL's ideas of how I should be
spending my time. Neither can I control what the SO2R or the multi-multi
guys are doing. If I do better than last time great. If not, try again
next go round.

73,
Gary AL9A


----- Original Message -----
Sent: June 14, 2010 3:51 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating


>
> > If you can sit there and honestly tell this group that an SO2R station
> > does not have a distinct advantage, Fine.
>
> I'm not saying that it is not an advantage although there are single
> radio stations that regularly outscore two radio stations. A big
> part of the difference is still operator skill - a skilled operator
> can do more if he/she has more resources whether those resources be
> antennas, transmitters, receivers, or computers. In the end it is
> still HOW the operator uses those resources.
>
> What I am saying is that Radiosport has consistently based entry
> classification not on the number of transmitters, the use of computers,
> or the number/size of antennas but by whether ONE PERSON performed all
> of the operating functions (e.g. single operator) or more than one
> person was involved (e.g., multi-operator).
>
> > There will be operators who will find an advantage one way or another.
> > Having the Varsity squad play the Pro Team shouldn't be one of them.
>
> We're not talking about "teams" here - that would be multi-operator.
>
> Unlike auto racing or yachting, etc. radiosport does not define class
> based on hardware. Similarly, unlike golf or bowling radiosport does
> not define classes based on experience, age or "handicap."
>
> If you want to define competition based on a system of classes - first
> define the classes starting with antennas and experience. Since a
> single operator may transmit only one signal at a time and may listen
> to as many receivers as he can reasonably handle, the number of
> available transmitters (and the speed with which one can switch bands)
> should be one of the LAST things considered in defining "classes of
> competition."
>
> Understand, if you choose to redefine radiosport in an auto racing or
> golf model, you are exponentially increasing the cost and effort
> required of contest sponsors (based on the larger number of "classes"
> and the increased opportunity for cheating and thus the increased need
> for policing). There are many contest sponsors who will simply stop
> sponsoring their events rather than deal with the added cost and
> effort. As such, a wholesale restructuring of radiosport will probably
> kill it (but then maybe you're an anti-contester who *WANTS* to destroy
> radiosport).
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
> On 6/14/2010 7:10 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
>> Joe,
>>
>> If you can sit there and honestly tell this group that an SO2R station
>> does not have a distinct advantage, Fine.
>>
>> Then you would have no objection to a Single Operator, Single
>> Transmitter Rule.
>>
>> Certainly would even out the field, And since there is no advantage to
>> be had by having two radios....
>>
>>
>> The distinctions between a SO1R and SO2R are of the same types that
>> cause other sports to create brackets, classes, and power rankings.
>> Its done to allow a fair and reasonable competitive contest for all
>> competitors.
>> There will be operators who will find an advantage one way or another.
>> Having the Varsity squad play the Pro Team shouldn't be one of them.
>>
>>
>> Mike WB9B
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.

Don and all,

Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
immediate contacts are made.

As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?

73,

Cheryl, AA4YL
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. On Jun 14, 2010, at 6/14 9:16 AM, DickT-W0RAA wrote:

> The mood seems to be "To hell with the rules. As long
> as I can do it and don't get caught, I will."

If I were Don, I would quietly report the call sign to the contest
sponsors. The log checker (didn't Eddie use to jokingly call them log
chequers? :-) may be able to legitimately nit pick his log to death
even if they couldn't get him for the one signal at a time rule
infraction.

If this person has such a big ego that he feels compelled to cheat,
not winning one of top spots in a contest will probably be just as
devastating as being turned into a check log. For such a short
sprint, losing just a couple of QSOs could matter.

Remember that Al Capone was not put away for murder, but instead for
tax evasion.

73
Chen, W7AY

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Agreed Cheryl!
I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
together with some multi class.

73
Jim W7RY




> Don and all,
>
> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
> immediate contacts are made.
>
> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>
> 73,
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> lump it together with some multi class.

No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.

There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
stations.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
> Agreed Cheryl!
> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump it
> together with some multi class.
>
> 73
> Jim W7RY
>
>
>
>
>> Don and all,
>>
>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but
>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors start
>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It really
>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but no
>> immediate contacts are made.
>>
>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in the
>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL




>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
> stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
Geez -- could we just skip the annual multi-hundred message SO2R debate?

-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Cheryl Whitlock
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 15:20
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL



_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,

You do have a delete key on your keyboard, right?



> wrote:
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. That's correct they're switching back and forth quickly enough
that there is no "down time" on either frequency. A LEGAL SO2R
operator will still not transmit on both frequencies at the same
time but that doesn't mean he can't transmit on one and be
copying a station on the other.

Still, it's nothing more than rapid band switching as long as
one has the skill and hardware to make it work.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 4:19 PM, Cheryl Whitlock wrote:
> I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
> other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
> try, I will get told the frequency is in use.
>
> Cheryl, AA4YL
>
>
>
>
>>
>> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
>> > lump it together with some multi class.
>>
>> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
>> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
>> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
>> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
>> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>>
>> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
>> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
>> stations.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
There is no contest that has a "multi-transmitter" class for
single operators. Even for multi-operator classes the class
is based on the number of simultaneous SIGNALS not the number
of transmitters in the station.

Keep the discussion productions - stop the class warfare.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 5:05 PM, James Colville wrote:
>
>>
>> Marty,
>>
>> Like you I'm tired of the semi-annual attack on SO2R operators and
>> those who use every alleged instance of cheating as a pretense to
>> attack SO2R.
>>
>> > A single op operating one station cannot compete with another
>> > single op who possess the skill and hardware to operate two
>> > stations almost simo.
>>
>> And the answer to that is "so what?" Nowhere else in amateur
>> radio do we separate operators by skill levels, antenna size,
>> transceiver sensitivity, number of receivers, or any number
>> of other parameters.
>>
>> ## On the contrary.
> ## We put those folks in the multi transmitter class.
>
>
>
>> Keep the discussion productive and address cheating - stop using
>> the cheating problem as a pretense to engage in the amateur
>> equivalent of class warfare.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>> On 6/14/2010 4:23 PM, Martin Bluhm wrote:
>>> Sorry Joe, but have to disagree with you on this one up to a point. On
>> the
>>> cheating angle, I have to agree.
>>> This horse was ridden very hard and hung up soaking wet a few months
>> back.
>>> My feelings towards SO2R have not changed; although
>>> Like I say in the terms of cheating, I go along with you. Not opening the
>>> former thread again, it comes down to a competitive nature,
>>> Where the SO2R ops should be in a class by themselves. They are very
>> skilled
>>> and my hats off to them for doing what they do. A single op operating one
>>> station cannot compete with another single op who possess the skill and
>>> hardware to operate two stations almost simo. The numbers do not add up.
>>> Let them compete with each other. That is the only way.
>>>
>>> Enough said, back into the woodwork.
>>> 73
>>> Marty
>>> W8AKS
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> Behalf Of Joe Subich, W4TV
>>> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 20:13
>>> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating
>>>
>>>
>>> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
>>> > lump it together with some multi class.
>>>
>>> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
>>> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
>>> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
>>> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
>>> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>>>
>>> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
>>> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
>>> stations.
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>>
>>> On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
>>>> Agreed Cheryl!
>>>> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump
>>> it
>>>> together with some multi class.
>>>>
>>>> 73
>>>> Jim W7RY
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Don and all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough,
>>> but
>>>>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>>>>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors
>>> start
>>>>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It
>>> really
>>>>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but
>> no
>>>>> immediate contacts are made.
>>>>>
>>>>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in
>> the
>>>>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>>>>
>>>>> 73,
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>>>>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
Absolutely on the nail, Joe.

Let's keep it clear. If someone is cheating in a contest, in any way,
regardless of how many radios they have or what colour shirt they wear,
report them to the contest managers. The contest organisers made the rules
which are being broken. They can take action.

In any contest there will always be someone with a bigger amp, more radios,
stacked monobanders etc. They still need to be highly skilled operators; my
amateur radio licence was issued on the basis that it was for my
self-training and I am still learning after ** years! Now what's the best
time for 3C0 on 40 ....................

Cheers,

John GW4SKA




----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 9:13 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating


>
>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally
> there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill (and
> ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report him/her
> to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in their
> stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
> On 6/14/2010 1:36 PM, James Colville wrote:
>> Agreed Cheryl!
>> I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or lump
>> it
>> together with some multi class.
>>
>> 73
>> Jim W7RY
>>
>>
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Don and all,
>>>
>>> Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough,
>>> but
>>> it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests
>>> weekends as well. I don't see things changing until contest sponsors
>>> start
>>> banning SO2R from the contests, which I would cheer if they did. It
>>> really
>>> irks me to call CQ and get a message that the frequency is in use, but
>>> no
>>> immediate contacts are made.
>>>
>>> As far as cheating in general, I know a ham who has run high power in
>>> the
>>> contest, but enters under low power. What is the thrill in that?
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> Cheryl, AA4YL
>>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
There is no way a Single Op, with a Single transmitter should be up
against SO2R.

Sure someone can come up with a blackbox to keep only one signal on air
at any given time,
but still you have the distinct adavantages of two separate radios.


Time to let them be in their own class.

Mike, WB9B

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. "There is no way that someone with a trap vertical and a low wire
should be up against those with stacks of monobanders on multiple
towers. The station with multiple monoband stacks has an advantage
that no level of skill can overcome.

Time to let them be in their own class."

That sounds just about as silly to me as separate classes for those
with more than one transceiver.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 5:49 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
> There is no way a Single Op, with a Single transmitter should be up
> against SO2R.
>
> Sure someone can come up with a blackbox to keep only one signal on air
> at any given time,
> but still you have the distinct adavantages of two separate radios.
>
>
> Time to let them be in their own class.
>
> Mike, WB9B
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Just a joke friends.

If the station using "stacks of monobanders on multiple Towers" is running
QRP and the station using "trap vertical and a low wire" is running 15KW
they might be able to out score.

73 ES CUL
__________________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Joe,

If you can sit there and honestly tell this group that an SO2R station
does not have a distinct advantage, Fine.

Then you would have no objection to a Single Operator, Single
Transmitter Rule.

Certainly would even out the field, And since there is no advantage to
be had by having two radios....


The distinctions between a SO1R and SO2R are of the same types that
cause other sports to create brackets, classes, and power rankings.
Its done to allow a fair and reasonable competitive contest for all
competitors.
There will be operators who will find an advantage one way or another.
Having the Varsity squad play the Pro Team shouldn't be one of them.


Mike WB9B


_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Not all SO2 ops do this and there are lots of frequencies especially on CW.


CC Packet Cluster W0MU-1
W0MU.NET or 67.40.148.194

"A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may
never get over." Ben Franklin



-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Cheryl Whitlock
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 2:20 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep
other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I
try, I will get told the frequency is in use.

Cheryl, AA4YL




>
> > I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CON****... Or
> > lump it together with some multi class.
>
> No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands
> quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that
> legally there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks skill
> (and ethical compass) to use the hardware within the rules, report
> him/her to the contest sponsors for the necessary action.
>
> There is no justification for treating one set of SINGLE OPERATORS any
> differently from any others based only on the hardware located in
> their stations.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
> If you can sit there and honestly tell this group that an SO2R station
> does not have a distinct advantage, Fine.

I'm not saying that it is not an advantage although there are single
radio stations that regularly outscore two radio stations. A big
part of the difference is still operator skill - a skilled operator
can do more if he/she has more resources whether those resources be
antennas, transmitters, receivers, or computers. In the end it is
still HOW the operator uses those resources.

What I am saying is that Radiosport has consistently based entry
classification not on the number of transmitters, the use of computers,
or the number/size of antennas but by whether ONE PERSON performed all
of the operating functions (e.g. single operator) or more than one
person was involved (e.g., multi-operator).

> There will be operators who will find an advantage one way or another.
> Having the Varsity squad play the Pro Team shouldn't be one of them.

We're not talking about "teams" here - that would be multi-operator.

Unlike auto racing or yachting, etc. radiosport does not define class
based on hardware. Similarly, unlike golf or bowling radiosport does
not define classes based on experience, age or "handicap."

If you want to define competition based on a system of classes - first
define the classes starting with antennas and experience. Since a
single operator may transmit only one signal at a time and may listen
to as many receivers as he can reasonably handle, the number of
available transmitters (and the speed with which one can switch bands)
should be one of the LAST things considered in defining "classes of
competition."

Understand, if you choose to redefine radiosport in an auto racing or
golf model, you are exponentially increasing the cost and effort
required of contest sponsors (based on the larger number of "classes"
and the increased opportunity for cheating and thus the increased need
for policing). There are many contest sponsors who will simply stop
sponsoring their events rather than deal with the added cost and
effort. As such, a wholesale restructuring of radiosport will probably
kill it (but then maybe you're an anti-contester who *WANTS* to destroy
radiosport).

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 7:10 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
> Joe,
>
> If you can sit there and honestly tell this group that an SO2R station
> does not have a distinct advantage, Fine.
>
> Then you would have no objection to a Single Operator, Single
> Transmitter Rule.
>
> Certainly would even out the field, And since there is no advantage to
> be had by having two radios....
>
>
> The distinctions between a SO1R and SO2R are of the same types that
> cause other sports to create brackets, classes, and power rankings.
> Its done to allow a fair and reasonable competitive contest for all
> competitors.
> There will be operators who will find an advantage one way or another.
> Having the Varsity squad play the Pro Team shouldn't be one of them.
>
>
> Mike WB9B
>
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Where do you draw the line? My radio has two separate receivers and two
vfo's. One radio. I can change bands very fast if I want. So you want to
classify every piece of gear on someones shack?


CC Packet Cluster W0MU-1
W0MU.NET or 67.40.148.194

"A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may
never get over." Ben Franklin



-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Michael Haack
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 3:50 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

There is no way a Single Op, with a Single transmitter should be up against
SO2R.

Sure someone can come up with a blackbox to keep only one signal on air at
any given time, but still you have the distinct adavantages of two separate
radios.


Time to let them be in their own class.

Mike, WB9B

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. A great op using SO2R probably has an advantage. So do ops with 200 ft
towers, big amps, 11k rigs, hardline, stacks etc.

What I hear is a bunch of people that do not want to change and embrace
something that would make them better scores.

So I guess operators should be judged and put in their own categories
because they are better than you? Really?


CC Packet Cluster W0MU-1
W0MU.NET or 67.40.148.194

"A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may
never get over." Ben Franklin



-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Michael Haack
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 5:11 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating

Joe,

If you can sit there and honestly tell this group that an SO2R station does
not have a distinct advantage, Fine.

Then you would have no objection to a Single Operator, Single Transmitter
Rule.

Certainly would even out the field, And since there is no advantage to be
had by having two radios....


The distinctions between a SO1R and SO2R are of the same types that
cause other sports to create brackets, classes, and power rankings.
Its done to allow a fair and reasonable competitive contest for all
competitors.
There will be operators who will find an advantage one way or another.
Having the Varsity squad play the Pro Team shouldn't be one of them.


Mike WB9B


_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. I always run SO1R and while I have looked at trying to set up a SO2R station
I doubt it will ever happen. The technical challenge could eventually be
overcome, but my main problem is the lack of sufficient real estate to
support the additional antennas needed for SO2R. So I content myself with
doing the best I can each contest and besting my constant nemesis - me! Try
not to make too many bone headed mistakes like running QRO into the wrong
antenna, getting dyslexic at the keyboard and transposing the letters,
working split the wrong way, etc. My overall goal is to best my last outing
in whatever contest it is. I can't control the weather (wind here in AK),
the sun spots, the geomagnetic field, and the XYL's ideas of how I should be
spending my time. Neither can I control what the SO2R or the multi-multi
guys are doing. If I do better than last time great. If not, try again
next go round.

73,
Gary AL9A


----- Original Message -----
Sent: June 14, 2010 3:51 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating


>
> > If you can sit there and honestly tell this group that an SO2R station
> > does not have a distinct advantage, Fine.
>
> I'm not saying that it is not an advantage although there are single
> radio stations that regularly outscore two radio stations. A big
> part of the difference is still operator skill - a skilled operator
> can do more if he/she has more resources whether those resources be
> antennas, transmitters, receivers, or computers. In the end it is
> still HOW the operator uses those resources.
>
> What I am saying is that Radiosport has consistently based entry
> classification not on the number of transmitters, the use of computers,
> or the number/size of antennas but by whether ONE PERSON performed all
> of the operating functions (e.g. single operator) or more than one
> person was involved (e.g., multi-operator).
>
> > There will be operators who will find an advantage one way or another.
> > Having the Varsity squad play the Pro Team shouldn't be one of them.
>
> We're not talking about "teams" here - that would be multi-operator.
>
> Unlike auto racing or yachting, etc. radiosport does not define class
> based on hardware. Similarly, unlike golf or bowling radiosport does
> not define classes based on experience, age or "handicap."
>
> If you want to define competition based on a system of classes - first
> define the classes starting with antennas and experience. Since a
> single operator may transmit only one signal at a time and may listen
> to as many receivers as he can reasonably handle, the number of
> available transmitters (and the speed with which one can switch bands)
> should be one of the LAST things considered in defining "classes of
> competition."
>
> Understand, if you choose to redefine radiosport in an auto racing or
> golf model, you are exponentially increasing the cost and effort
> required of contest sponsors (based on the larger number of "classes"
> and the increased opportunity for cheating and thus the increased need
> for policing). There are many contest sponsors who will simply stop
> sponsoring their events rather than deal with the added cost and
> effort. As such, a wholesale restructuring of radiosport will probably
> kill it (but then maybe you're an anti-contester who *WANTS* to destroy
> radiosport).
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
> On 6/14/2010 7:10 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
>> Joe,
>>
>> If you can sit there and honestly tell this group that an SO2R station
>> does not have a distinct advantage, Fine.
>>
>> Then you would have no objection to a Single Operator, Single
>> Transmitter Rule.
>>
>> Certainly would even out the field, And since there is no advantage to
>> be had by having two radios....
>>
>>
>> The distinctions between a SO1R and SO2R are of the same types that
>> cause other sports to create brackets, classes, and power rankings.
>> Its done to allow a fair and reasonable competitive contest for all
>> competitors.
>> There will be operators who will find an advantage one way or another.
>> Having the Varsity squad play the Pro Team shouldn't be one of them.
>>
>>
>> Mike WB9B
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 16:47:00 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>Like you I'm tired of the semi-annual attack on SO2R operators and
>those who use every alleged instance of cheating as a pretense to
>attack SO2R.

Say what? This is the first time I have ever seen SO2R linked with
cheating. Personally, I don't think the link is valid, but please Joe,
don't bring spurious statements into the discussion.


> Nowhere else in amateur
>radio do we separate operators by skill levels, antenna size,
>transceiver sensitivity, number of receivers, or any number
>of other parameters.

Nowhere else? Did you forget about separation by power class or number
of operators? And of course, BARTG has separate classes for skill
levels based on past scores. Joe, if you ever actually operated RTTY
contests you would know this already. Check your logs folks - how many
W4TV contest QSOs do you find? Mine has zero in 17 years of RTTY
contesting. Let's keep the discussion limited to folks who actually
OPERATE RTTY contests and ignore those who only sell commercial
products designed to enhance SO2R. Joe, why not tell the folks what
products you are the distributor for?

According to the poll taken by AA5AU a year or so ago, by a ratio of
about two to one, those voting would prefer separate classes for one
radio and two radio ops. The issue among contesters themselves has
already been decided, now it's up to the contest sponsors to take
action.

73, Bill W6WRT

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.