Bill,

On both counts, Thanks saying what needed to be said.


Mike WB9B
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

Bill,

On both counts, Thanks saying what needed to be said.


Mike WB9B
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,
Dont feel bad I too have done this on several occasions with N1MM so you are
not alone.

And just my two cents worth, I haven't done any RTTY contest lately because
I just got tired of putting up with all the violators, run freq grabbers,
and just generally unsportsman like behavior. I am by far and away a small
station, 100watts and wires, no amps -- just can't put it in the budget
right now. Not SO2R just plain ole the little guy. I did alright in the
contest I did participate in but just wanted to enjoy my contest not get run
over by someone running a bigger system than I am. And I agree 100 if
people are cheating then by god they should be reported.

And please for the love of god, give us little guys a chance and quit
running us off. I won't give the call but on three different occasions I
worked a RTTY tester who answered my run, thanked me then immediately took
off calling CQ on my freq. Same guy each time, hell he has probably been
mentioned here already --- oh yeah and these weren't Sprints either. Hope to
make a comeback on the RTTY scene soon once I get a weekend where there is a
good test and not a CW test I am more interested in --- yep fell off the
Digi bandwagon and landed on the CW.. ;)


Jeremy
N4JIK formerly KD4LCR/7J6CEM
Fort Benning, GA/Phenix City, AL
Triple Play Award #327

"The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but
because he loves what is behind him." G. K. Chesterton




-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of W0MU Mike Fatchett
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 3:43 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

Please report him. I have heard this too. This is not a problem with SO2R
it is a problem with the operator. We don't remove cars from the road
because the speed or break the rules, they get tickets and their ability to
drive a car may be removed. Maybe this operator was at a station that could
have 6 bands going at once.

As already state folks use high power and claim less, use amps that put out
well over our legal limit etc. This has been going on for years and years.

As for getting spotting on his run frequency I have done it. If you use
N1MM and do not have the running box checked and have the spot new calls
going this will happen. If your spots window it might take a bit to notice.

W0MU



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 Don Hill AA5AU
Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 11:04 PM
Subject: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

As I tuned around the bands during the last 8 hour segment, I found a USA
SO2R station transmitting on both 15 and 20 meters at the same time in a
blatant violation of the rules. It wasn't a case of someone just making a
mistake. I watched for 15-20 minutes and simply couldn't believe what I was
seeing. I did let them know he or they were breaking the rules and he/they
immediately stopped.
But it made me mad.

Then a little while longer, I saw my call pop up on the bandmap on 20 meters
even though I was S&P on that band. At first I thought someone made a
mistake. Then I looked at the origin of the spot and realized it was a
station I had just worked. This operator spotted me on his run frequency.
Although that is not a direct violation of the rules, it still irked me.

I don't know how much of this goes on, but it needs to stop. The next time
I catch someone transmitting two signals at the same time, I will call them
out publicly on it. I realize there will be instances of stations
transmitting at the same time (Multi-2, Multi-Multi). But the rules of the
DLDC were specific:

4. GENERAL for all categories:

(e) Only one transmitted signal is permitted at any time.

As far as spotting other stations on one's run frequency, it's just the
wrong thing to do. There have been times, such as when I was on ten meters,
when I wanted to spot someone on my run frequency just to let everyone else
know the band was open. But I didn't. So don't get caught up in it.

There's been a lot of cheating going on in CW and SSB contests and it's
apparent there is cheating on RTTY too. I'm not sure what we can do about
it other than make it a point to let people know we aren't going to tolerate
it. I'm definitely not going to tolerate it.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

Bill,

On both counts, Thanks saying what needed to be said.


Mike WB9B
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,
Dont feel bad I too have done this on several occasions with N1MM so you are
not alone.

And just my two cents worth, I haven't done any RTTY contest lately because
I just got tired of putting up with all the violators, run freq grabbers,
and just generally unsportsman like behavior. I am by far and away a small
station, 100watts and wires, no amps -- just can't put it in the budget
right now. Not SO2R just plain ole the little guy. I did alright in the
contest I did participate in but just wanted to enjoy my contest not get run
over by someone running a bigger system than I am. And I agree 100 if
people are cheating then by god they should be reported.

And please for the love of god, give us little guys a chance and quit
running us off. I won't give the call but on three different occasions I
worked a RTTY tester who answered my run, thanked me then immediately took
off calling CQ on my freq. Same guy each time, hell he has probably been
mentioned here already --- oh yeah and these weren't Sprints either. Hope to
make a comeback on the RTTY scene soon once I get a weekend where there is a
good test and not a CW test I am more interested in --- yep fell off the
Digi bandwagon and landed on the CW.. ;)


Jeremy
N4JIK formerly KD4LCR/7J6CEM
Fort Benning, GA/Phenix City, AL
Triple Play Award #327

"The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but
because he loves what is behind him." G. K. Chesterton




-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of W0MU Mike Fatchett
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 3:43 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

Please report him. I have heard this too. This is not a problem with SO2R
it is a problem with the operator. We don't remove cars from the road
because the speed or break the rules, they get tickets and their ability to
drive a car may be removed. Maybe this operator was at a station that could
have 6 bands going at once.

As already state folks use high power and claim less, use amps that put out
well over our legal limit etc. This has been going on for years and years.

As for getting spotting on his run frequency I have done it. If you use
N1MM and do not have the running box checked and have the spot new calls
going this will happen. If your spots window it might take a bit to notice.

W0MU



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 Don Hill AA5AU
Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 11:04 PM
Subject: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

As I tuned around the bands during the last 8 hour segment, I found a USA
SO2R station transmitting on both 15 and 20 meters at the same time in a
blatant violation of the rules. It wasn't a case of someone just making a
mistake. I watched for 15-20 minutes and simply couldn't believe what I was
seeing. I did let them know he or they were breaking the rules and he/they
immediately stopped.
But it made me mad.

Then a little while longer, I saw my call pop up on the bandmap on 20 meters
even though I was S&P on that band. At first I thought someone made a
mistake. Then I looked at the origin of the spot and realized it was a
station I had just worked. This operator spotted me on his run frequency.
Although that is not a direct violation of the rules, it still irked me.

I don't know how much of this goes on, but it needs to stop. The next time
I catch someone transmitting two signals at the same time, I will call them
out publicly on it. I realize there will be instances of stations
transmitting at the same time (Multi-2, Multi-Multi). But the rules of the
DLDC were specific:

4. GENERAL for all categories:

(e) Only one transmitted signal is permitted at any time.

As far as spotting other stations on one's run frequency, it's just the
wrong thing to do. There have been times, such as when I was on ten meters,
when I wanted to spot someone on my run frequency just to let everyone else
know the band was open. But I didn't. So don't get caught up in it.

There's been a lot of cheating going on in CW and SSB contests and it's
apparent there is cheating on RTTY too. I'm not sure what we can do about
it other than make it a point to let people know we aren't going to tolerate
it. I'm definitely not going to tolerate it.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>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

REPLY:

That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in
contests himself. :-) :-) :-)

Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have
more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does not appear
even once.

Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North
American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R contesting.
Period.

When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start
listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

Bill,

On both counts, Thanks saying what needed to be said.


Mike WB9B
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,
Dont feel bad I too have done this on several occasions with N1MM so you are
not alone.

And just my two cents worth, I haven't done any RTTY contest lately because
I just got tired of putting up with all the violators, run freq grabbers,
and just generally unsportsman like behavior. I am by far and away a small
station, 100watts and wires, no amps -- just can't put it in the budget
right now. Not SO2R just plain ole the little guy. I did alright in the
contest I did participate in but just wanted to enjoy my contest not get run
over by someone running a bigger system than I am. And I agree 100 if
people are cheating then by god they should be reported.

And please for the love of god, give us little guys a chance and quit
running us off. I won't give the call but on three different occasions I
worked a RTTY tester who answered my run, thanked me then immediately took
off calling CQ on my freq. Same guy each time, hell he has probably been
mentioned here already --- oh yeah and these weren't Sprints either. Hope to
make a comeback on the RTTY scene soon once I get a weekend where there is a
good test and not a CW test I am more interested in --- yep fell off the
Digi bandwagon and landed on the CW.. ;)


Jeremy
N4JIK formerly KD4LCR/7J6CEM
Fort Benning, GA/Phenix City, AL
Triple Play Award #327

"The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but
because he loves what is behind him." G. K. Chesterton




-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of W0MU Mike Fatchett
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 3:43 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

Please report him. I have heard this too. This is not a problem with SO2R
it is a problem with the operator. We don't remove cars from the road
because the speed or break the rules, they get tickets and their ability to
drive a car may be removed. Maybe this operator was at a station that could
have 6 bands going at once.

As already state folks use high power and claim less, use amps that put out
well over our legal limit etc. This has been going on for years and years.

As for getting spotting on his run frequency I have done it. If you use
N1MM and do not have the running box checked and have the spot new calls
going this will happen. If your spots window it might take a bit to notice.

W0MU



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 Don Hill AA5AU
Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 11:04 PM
Subject: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

As I tuned around the bands during the last 8 hour segment, I found a USA
SO2R station transmitting on both 15 and 20 meters at the same time in a
blatant violation of the rules. It wasn't a case of someone just making a
mistake. I watched for 15-20 minutes and simply couldn't believe what I was
seeing. I did let them know he or they were breaking the rules and he/they
immediately stopped.
But it made me mad.

Then a little while longer, I saw my call pop up on the bandmap on 20 meters
even though I was S&P on that band. At first I thought someone made a
mistake. Then I looked at the origin of the spot and realized it was a
station I had just worked. This operator spotted me on his run frequency.
Although that is not a direct violation of the rules, it still irked me.

I don't know how much of this goes on, but it needs to stop. The next time
I catch someone transmitting two signals at the same time, I will call them
out publicly on it. I realize there will be instances of stations
transmitting at the same time (Multi-2, Multi-Multi). But the rules of the
DLDC were specific:

4. GENERAL for all categories:

(e) Only one transmitted signal is permitted at any time.

As far as spotting other stations on one's run frequency, it's just the
wrong thing to do. There have been times, such as when I was on ten meters,
when I wanted to spot someone on my run frequency just to let everyone else
know the band was open. But I didn't. So don't get caught up in it.

There's been a lot of cheating going on in CW and SSB contests and it's
apparent there is cheating on RTTY too. I'm not sure what we can do about
it other than make it a point to let people know we aren't going to tolerate
it. I'm definitely not going to tolerate it.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>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

REPLY:

That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in
contests himself. :-) :-) :-)

Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have
more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does not appear
even once.

Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North
American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R contesting.
Period.

When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start
listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

> If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up and
> operate a full blown, legal limit SO2R, Thats fine.
> But don't expect to be in competition with someone of a more
> modest station.

How about, "If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up
multiple towers with multiple stacked arrays, that's fine. But don't
expect to be in competition with someone with a more modest station?

> The point of this whole thread and many more before it is simply,
> Make SO2R its own class.
> Do that, and we bring operator skill to an even fight.

That's BS - you don't even begin to bring operator skill to an "even
fight" unless you control for *ALL* - *100%* of the differences between
stations including antennas, receiver sensitivity, and geographical
differences. SO2R is only *ONE* component in the mix.

As Contesting Hall of Fame inductee AA5AU has stated publicly, he
started using SO2R to make up for the disadvantages he had in
antennas. There was no way he could compete with the stacks of
monoband antennas that dominated RTTY radiosport. I suspect the
same is true in other modes as well ... a well designed, modest
station with a couple of tribanders will allow a *SKILLED* operator
to compete on a more level playing field with a less skilled operator
who has bigger antennas and engages in "checkbook contesting."

Making SO2R its own class only serves to push operators who choose
one tool into a separate class. You, and others like you who would
destroy 60 years of contesting tradition, will still loose to the
deep pocket operators who can build multiple tower antenna farms.

However, I'll make you this offer ... if you are willing to convince
contest sponsors to create a class that excludes *BOTH* SO2R and any
antenna with more than 2.3 dBi gain in free space or more than 10
meters above ground, I'll happily support you in your effort to
"bring operator skill to an even fight." Otherwise, your argument
is nothing more than an attempt to use "operator skill" as a
codeword for "I don't like SO2R."

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 8:33 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
> Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>> > 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.
>>
>>
>
>> So If your Not saying it is Not an advantage, then you are agreeing
>> that a SO2R operator does have a edge.
> Then Fine, Let him keep the edge, but let him take it up against the
> skills of other SO2R stations.
> And let the SO1R take their skills, fairly, against other SO1R stations.
>
> If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up and operate
> a full blown, legal limit SO2R, Thats fine.
> But don't expect to be in competition with someone of a more modest
> station.
> The point of this whole thread and many more before it is simply,
> Make SO2R its own class.
> Do that, and we bring operator skill to an even fight.
>
> Mike WB9B
>
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

Bill,

On both counts, Thanks saying what needed to be said.


Mike WB9B
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,
Dont feel bad I too have done this on several occasions with N1MM so you are
not alone.

And just my two cents worth, I haven't done any RTTY contest lately because
I just got tired of putting up with all the violators, run freq grabbers,
and just generally unsportsman like behavior. I am by far and away a small
station, 100watts and wires, no amps -- just can't put it in the budget
right now. Not SO2R just plain ole the little guy. I did alright in the
contest I did participate in but just wanted to enjoy my contest not get run
over by someone running a bigger system than I am. And I agree 100 if
people are cheating then by god they should be reported.

And please for the love of god, give us little guys a chance and quit
running us off. I won't give the call but on three different occasions I
worked a RTTY tester who answered my run, thanked me then immediately took
off calling CQ on my freq. Same guy each time, hell he has probably been
mentioned here already --- oh yeah and these weren't Sprints either. Hope to
make a comeback on the RTTY scene soon once I get a weekend where there is a
good test and not a CW test I am more interested in --- yep fell off the
Digi bandwagon and landed on the CW.. ;)


Jeremy
N4JIK formerly KD4LCR/7J6CEM
Fort Benning, GA/Phenix City, AL
Triple Play Award #327

"The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but
because he loves what is behind him." G. K. Chesterton




-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of W0MU Mike Fatchett
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 3:43 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

Please report him. I have heard this too. This is not a problem with SO2R
it is a problem with the operator. We don't remove cars from the road
because the speed or break the rules, they get tickets and their ability to
drive a car may be removed. Maybe this operator was at a station that could
have 6 bands going at once.

As already state folks use high power and claim less, use amps that put out
well over our legal limit etc. This has been going on for years and years.

As for getting spotting on his run frequency I have done it. If you use
N1MM and do not have the running box checked and have the spot new calls
going this will happen. If your spots window it might take a bit to notice.

W0MU



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 Don Hill AA5AU
Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 11:04 PM
Subject: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

As I tuned around the bands during the last 8 hour segment, I found a USA
SO2R station transmitting on both 15 and 20 meters at the same time in a
blatant violation of the rules. It wasn't a case of someone just making a
mistake. I watched for 15-20 minutes and simply couldn't believe what I was
seeing. I did let them know he or they were breaking the rules and he/they
immediately stopped.
But it made me mad.

Then a little while longer, I saw my call pop up on the bandmap on 20 meters
even though I was S&P on that band. At first I thought someone made a
mistake. Then I looked at the origin of the spot and realized it was a
station I had just worked. This operator spotted me on his run frequency.
Although that is not a direct violation of the rules, it still irked me.

I don't know how much of this goes on, but it needs to stop. The next time
I catch someone transmitting two signals at the same time, I will call them
out publicly on it. I realize there will be instances of stations
transmitting at the same time (Multi-2, Multi-Multi). But the rules of the
DLDC were specific:

4. GENERAL for all categories:

(e) Only one transmitted signal is permitted at any time.

As far as spotting other stations on one's run frequency, it's just the
wrong thing to do. There have been times, such as when I was on ten meters,
when I wanted to spot someone on my run frequency just to let everyone else
know the band was open. But I didn't. So don't get caught up in it.

There's been a lot of cheating going on in CW and SSB contests and it's
apparent there is cheating on RTTY too. I'm not sure what we can do about
it other than make it a point to let people know we aren't going to tolerate
it. I'm definitely not going to tolerate it.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>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

REPLY:

That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in
contests himself. :-) :-) :-)

Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have
more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does not appear
even once.

Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North
American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R contesting.
Period.

When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start
listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

> If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up and
> operate a full blown, legal limit SO2R, Thats fine.
> But don't expect to be in competition with someone of a more
> modest station.

How about, "If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up
multiple towers with multiple stacked arrays, that's fine. But don't
expect to be in competition with someone with a more modest station?

> The point of this whole thread and many more before it is simply,
> Make SO2R its own class.
> Do that, and we bring operator skill to an even fight.

That's BS - you don't even begin to bring operator skill to an "even
fight" unless you control for *ALL* - *100%* of the differences between
stations including antennas, receiver sensitivity, and geographical
differences. SO2R is only *ONE* component in the mix.

As Contesting Hall of Fame inductee AA5AU has stated publicly, he
started using SO2R to make up for the disadvantages he had in
antennas. There was no way he could compete with the stacks of
monoband antennas that dominated RTTY radiosport. I suspect the
same is true in other modes as well ... a well designed, modest
station with a couple of tribanders will allow a *SKILLED* operator
to compete on a more level playing field with a less skilled operator
who has bigger antennas and engages in "checkbook contesting."

Making SO2R its own class only serves to push operators who choose
one tool into a separate class. You, and others like you who would
destroy 60 years of contesting tradition, will still loose to the
deep pocket operators who can build multiple tower antenna farms.

However, I'll make you this offer ... if you are willing to convince
contest sponsors to create a class that excludes *BOTH* SO2R and any
antenna with more than 2.3 dBi gain in free space or more than 10
meters above ground, I'll happily support you in your effort to
"bring operator skill to an even fight." Otherwise, your argument
is nothing more than an attempt to use "operator skill" as a
codeword for "I don't like SO2R."

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 8:33 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
> Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>> > 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.
>>
>>
>
>> So If your Not saying it is Not an advantage, then you are agreeing
>> that a SO2R operator does have a edge.
> Then Fine, Let him keep the edge, but let him take it up against the
> skills of other SO2R stations.
> And let the SO1R take their skills, fairly, against other SO1R stations.
>
> If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up and operate
> a full blown, legal limit SO2R, Thats fine.
> But don't expect to be in competition with someone of a more modest
> station.
> The point of this whole thread and many more before it is simply,
> Make SO2R its own class.
> Do that, and we bring operator skill to an even fight.
>
> Mike WB9B
>
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. I see this has deteriorated into hostile territory. I should have known better. Next time I'll keep my thoughts to myself, report
the offender to the contest manager and post the offender on the Internet.

I think we can squelch this discussion now since it's gone beyond being productive.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>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

REPLY:

That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)

Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
not appear even once.

Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
contesting.
Period.

When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

Bill,

On both counts, Thanks saying what needed to be said.


Mike WB9B
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,
Dont feel bad I too have done this on several occasions with N1MM so you are
not alone.

And just my two cents worth, I haven't done any RTTY contest lately because
I just got tired of putting up with all the violators, run freq grabbers,
and just generally unsportsman like behavior. I am by far and away a small
station, 100watts and wires, no amps -- just can't put it in the budget
right now. Not SO2R just plain ole the little guy. I did alright in the
contest I did participate in but just wanted to enjoy my contest not get run
over by someone running a bigger system than I am. And I agree 100 if
people are cheating then by god they should be reported.

And please for the love of god, give us little guys a chance and quit
running us off. I won't give the call but on three different occasions I
worked a RTTY tester who answered my run, thanked me then immediately took
off calling CQ on my freq. Same guy each time, hell he has probably been
mentioned here already --- oh yeah and these weren't Sprints either. Hope to
make a comeback on the RTTY scene soon once I get a weekend where there is a
good test and not a CW test I am more interested in --- yep fell off the
Digi bandwagon and landed on the CW.. ;)


Jeremy
N4JIK formerly KD4LCR/7J6CEM
Fort Benning, GA/Phenix City, AL
Triple Play Award #327

"The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but
because he loves what is behind him." G. K. Chesterton




-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of W0MU Mike Fatchett
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 3:43 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

Please report him. I have heard this too. This is not a problem with SO2R
it is a problem with the operator. We don't remove cars from the road
because the speed or break the rules, they get tickets and their ability to
drive a car may be removed. Maybe this operator was at a station that could
have 6 bands going at once.

As already state folks use high power and claim less, use amps that put out
well over our legal limit etc. This has been going on for years and years.

As for getting spotting on his run frequency I have done it. If you use
N1MM and do not have the running box checked and have the spot new calls
going this will happen. If your spots window it might take a bit to notice.

W0MU



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 Don Hill AA5AU
Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 11:04 PM
Subject: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

As I tuned around the bands during the last 8 hour segment, I found a USA
SO2R station transmitting on both 15 and 20 meters at the same time in a
blatant violation of the rules. It wasn't a case of someone just making a
mistake. I watched for 15-20 minutes and simply couldn't believe what I was
seeing. I did let them know he or they were breaking the rules and he/they
immediately stopped.
But it made me mad.

Then a little while longer, I saw my call pop up on the bandmap on 20 meters
even though I was S&P on that band. At first I thought someone made a
mistake. Then I looked at the origin of the spot and realized it was a
station I had just worked. This operator spotted me on his run frequency.
Although that is not a direct violation of the rules, it still irked me.

I don't know how much of this goes on, but it needs to stop. The next time
I catch someone transmitting two signals at the same time, I will call them
out publicly on it. I realize there will be instances of stations
transmitting at the same time (Multi-2, Multi-Multi). But the rules of the
DLDC were specific:

4. GENERAL for all categories:

(e) Only one transmitted signal is permitted at any time.

As far as spotting other stations on one's run frequency, it's just the
wrong thing to do. There have been times, such as when I was on ten meters,
when I wanted to spot someone on my run frequency just to let everyone else
know the band was open. But I didn't. So don't get caught up in it.

There's been a lot of cheating going on in CW and SSB contests and it's
apparent there is cheating on RTTY too. I'm not sure what we can do about
it other than make it a point to let people know we aren't going to tolerate
it. I'm definitely not going to tolerate it.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>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

REPLY:

That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in
contests himself. :-) :-) :-)

Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have
more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does not appear
even once.

Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North
American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R contesting.
Period.

When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start
listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

> If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up and
> operate a full blown, legal limit SO2R, Thats fine.
> But don't expect to be in competition with someone of a more
> modest station.

How about, "If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up
multiple towers with multiple stacked arrays, that's fine. But don't
expect to be in competition with someone with a more modest station?

> The point of this whole thread and many more before it is simply,
> Make SO2R its own class.
> Do that, and we bring operator skill to an even fight.

That's BS - you don't even begin to bring operator skill to an "even
fight" unless you control for *ALL* - *100%* of the differences between
stations including antennas, receiver sensitivity, and geographical
differences. SO2R is only *ONE* component in the mix.

As Contesting Hall of Fame inductee AA5AU has stated publicly, he
started using SO2R to make up for the disadvantages he had in
antennas. There was no way he could compete with the stacks of
monoband antennas that dominated RTTY radiosport. I suspect the
same is true in other modes as well ... a well designed, modest
station with a couple of tribanders will allow a *SKILLED* operator
to compete on a more level playing field with a less skilled operator
who has bigger antennas and engages in "checkbook contesting."

Making SO2R its own class only serves to push operators who choose
one tool into a separate class. You, and others like you who would
destroy 60 years of contesting tradition, will still loose to the
deep pocket operators who can build multiple tower antenna farms.

However, I'll make you this offer ... if you are willing to convince
contest sponsors to create a class that excludes *BOTH* SO2R and any
antenna with more than 2.3 dBi gain in free space or more than 10
meters above ground, I'll happily support you in your effort to
"bring operator skill to an even fight." Otherwise, your argument
is nothing more than an attempt to use "operator skill" as a
codeword for "I don't like SO2R."

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 8:33 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
> Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>> > 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.
>>
>>
>
>> So If your Not saying it is Not an advantage, then you are agreeing
>> that a SO2R operator does have a edge.
> Then Fine, Let him keep the edge, but let him take it up against the
> skills of other SO2R stations.
> And let the SO1R take their skills, fairly, against other SO1R stations.
>
> If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up and operate
> a full blown, legal limit SO2R, Thats fine.
> But don't expect to be in competition with someone of a more modest
> station.
> The point of this whole thread and many more before it is simply,
> Make SO2R its own class.
> Do that, and we bring operator skill to an even fight.
>
> Mike WB9B
>
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. I see this has deteriorated into hostile territory. I should have known better. Next time I'll keep my thoughts to myself, report
the offender to the contest manager and post the offender on the Internet.

I think we can squelch this discussion now since it's gone beyond being productive.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>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

REPLY:

That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)

Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
not appear even once.

Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
contesting.
Period.

When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Thanks for the fun Don, Kinda like starting a riot then going home to
watch it on TV eh.
I'll stand with Bill, W6WRT on this one, And leave the lobbyists to
there own.

Cu in the next one, SO1R....
Mike WB9B



Don Hill AA5AU wrote:
> I see this has deteriorated into hostile territory. I should have known better. Next time I'll keep my thoughts to myself, report
> the offender to the contest manager and post the offender on the Internet.
>
> I think we can squelch this discussion now since it's gone beyond being productive.
>
> 73, Don AA5AU
> http://www.aa5au.com
> http://www.rttycontesting.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>
>> 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
>>
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
> not appear even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
> contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

Bill,

On both counts, Thanks saying what needed to be said.


Mike WB9B
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,
Dont feel bad I too have done this on several occasions with N1MM so you are
not alone.

And just my two cents worth, I haven't done any RTTY contest lately because
I just got tired of putting up with all the violators, run freq grabbers,
and just generally unsportsman like behavior. I am by far and away a small
station, 100watts and wires, no amps -- just can't put it in the budget
right now. Not SO2R just plain ole the little guy. I did alright in the
contest I did participate in but just wanted to enjoy my contest not get run
over by someone running a bigger system than I am. And I agree 100 if
people are cheating then by god they should be reported.

And please for the love of god, give us little guys a chance and quit
running us off. I won't give the call but on three different occasions I
worked a RTTY tester who answered my run, thanked me then immediately took
off calling CQ on my freq. Same guy each time, hell he has probably been
mentioned here already --- oh yeah and these weren't Sprints either. Hope to
make a comeback on the RTTY scene soon once I get a weekend where there is a
good test and not a CW test I am more interested in --- yep fell off the
Digi bandwagon and landed on the CW.. ;)


Jeremy
N4JIK formerly KD4LCR/7J6CEM
Fort Benning, GA/Phenix City, AL
Triple Play Award #327

"The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but
because he loves what is behind him." G. K. Chesterton




-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of W0MU Mike Fatchett
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 3:43 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

Please report him. I have heard this too. This is not a problem with SO2R
it is a problem with the operator. We don't remove cars from the road
because the speed or break the rules, they get tickets and their ability to
drive a car may be removed. Maybe this operator was at a station that could
have 6 bands going at once.

As already state folks use high power and claim less, use amps that put out
well over our legal limit etc. This has been going on for years and years.

As for getting spotting on his run frequency I have done it. If you use
N1MM and do not have the running box checked and have the spot new calls
going this will happen. If your spots window it might take a bit to notice.

W0MU



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 Don Hill AA5AU
Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 11:04 PM
Subject: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

As I tuned around the bands during the last 8 hour segment, I found a USA
SO2R station transmitting on both 15 and 20 meters at the same time in a
blatant violation of the rules. It wasn't a case of someone just making a
mistake. I watched for 15-20 minutes and simply couldn't believe what I was
seeing. I did let them know he or they were breaking the rules and he/they
immediately stopped.
But it made me mad.

Then a little while longer, I saw my call pop up on the bandmap on 20 meters
even though I was S&P on that band. At first I thought someone made a
mistake. Then I looked at the origin of the spot and realized it was a
station I had just worked. This operator spotted me on his run frequency.
Although that is not a direct violation of the rules, it still irked me.

I don't know how much of this goes on, but it needs to stop. The next time
I catch someone transmitting two signals at the same time, I will call them
out publicly on it. I realize there will be instances of stations
transmitting at the same time (Multi-2, Multi-Multi). But the rules of the
DLDC were specific:

4. GENERAL for all categories:

(e) Only one transmitted signal is permitted at any time.

As far as spotting other stations on one's run frequency, it's just the
wrong thing to do. There have been times, such as when I was on ten meters,
when I wanted to spot someone on my run frequency just to let everyone else
know the band was open. But I didn't. So don't get caught up in it.

There's been a lot of cheating going on in CW and SSB contests and it's
apparent there is cheating on RTTY too. I'm not sure what we can do about
it other than make it a point to let people know we aren't going to tolerate
it. I'm definitely not going to tolerate it.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>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

REPLY:

That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in
contests himself. :-) :-) :-)

Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have
more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does not appear
even once.

Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North
American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R contesting.
Period.

When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start
listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

> If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up and
> operate a full blown, legal limit SO2R, Thats fine.
> But don't expect to be in competition with someone of a more
> modest station.

How about, "If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up
multiple towers with multiple stacked arrays, that's fine. But don't
expect to be in competition with someone with a more modest station?

> The point of this whole thread and many more before it is simply,
> Make SO2R its own class.
> Do that, and we bring operator skill to an even fight.

That's BS - you don't even begin to bring operator skill to an "even
fight" unless you control for *ALL* - *100%* of the differences between
stations including antennas, receiver sensitivity, and geographical
differences. SO2R is only *ONE* component in the mix.

As Contesting Hall of Fame inductee AA5AU has stated publicly, he
started using SO2R to make up for the disadvantages he had in
antennas. There was no way he could compete with the stacks of
monoband antennas that dominated RTTY radiosport. I suspect the
same is true in other modes as well ... a well designed, modest
station with a couple of tribanders will allow a *SKILLED* operator
to compete on a more level playing field with a less skilled operator
who has bigger antennas and engages in "checkbook contesting."

Making SO2R its own class only serves to push operators who choose
one tool into a separate class. You, and others like you who would
destroy 60 years of contesting tradition, will still loose to the
deep pocket operators who can build multiple tower antenna farms.

However, I'll make you this offer ... if you are willing to convince
contest sponsors to create a class that excludes *BOTH* SO2R and any
antenna with more than 2.3 dBi gain in free space or more than 10
meters above ground, I'll happily support you in your effort to
"bring operator skill to an even fight." Otherwise, your argument
is nothing more than an attempt to use "operator skill" as a
codeword for "I don't like SO2R."

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 8:33 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
> Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>> > 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.
>>
>>
>
>> So If your Not saying it is Not an advantage, then you are agreeing
>> that a SO2R operator does have a edge.
> Then Fine, Let him keep the edge, but let him take it up against the
> skills of other SO2R stations.
> And let the SO1R take their skills, fairly, against other SO1R stations.
>
> If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up and operate
> a full blown, legal limit SO2R, Thats fine.
> But don't expect to be in competition with someone of a more modest
> station.
> The point of this whole thread and many more before it is simply,
> Make SO2R its own class.
> Do that, and we bring operator skill to an even fight.
>
> Mike WB9B
>
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. I see this has deteriorated into hostile territory. I should have known better. Next time I'll keep my thoughts to myself, report
the offender to the contest manager and post the offender on the Internet.

I think we can squelch this discussion now since it's gone beyond being productive.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>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

REPLY:

That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)

Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
not appear even once.

Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
contesting.
Period.

When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Thanks for the fun Don, Kinda like starting a riot then going home to
watch it on TV eh.
I'll stand with Bill, W6WRT on this one, And leave the lobbyists to
there own.

Cu in the next one, SO1R....
Mike WB9B



Don Hill AA5AU wrote:
> I see this has deteriorated into hostile territory. I should have known better. Next time I'll keep my thoughts to myself, report
> the offender to the contest manager and post the offender on the Internet.
>
> I think we can squelch this discussion now since it's gone beyond being productive.
>
> 73, Don AA5AU
> http://www.aa5au.com
> http://www.rttycontesting.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>
>> 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
>>
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
> not appear even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
> contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Of course Bill is a notoriously anti-technology and anti-SO2R
with nothing useful to add to the discussion. He's practiced
"if you don't like the message, attack the messenger" for a
long time.

Anyone who has changed calls recently and has no real antennas
in not likely to be in Bill's logs. I certainly don't find
W6WRT in the 25 - 35 year old logs from my very successful M/2
station back on Ohio.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>> 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
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
> not appear even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
> contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

Bill,

On both counts, Thanks saying what needed to be said.


Mike WB9B
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,
Dont feel bad I too have done this on several occasions with N1MM so you are
not alone.

And just my two cents worth, I haven't done any RTTY contest lately because
I just got tired of putting up with all the violators, run freq grabbers,
and just generally unsportsman like behavior. I am by far and away a small
station, 100watts and wires, no amps -- just can't put it in the budget
right now. Not SO2R just plain ole the little guy. I did alright in the
contest I did participate in but just wanted to enjoy my contest not get run
over by someone running a bigger system than I am. And I agree 100 if
people are cheating then by god they should be reported.

And please for the love of god, give us little guys a chance and quit
running us off. I won't give the call but on three different occasions I
worked a RTTY tester who answered my run, thanked me then immediately took
off calling CQ on my freq. Same guy each time, hell he has probably been
mentioned here already --- oh yeah and these weren't Sprints either. Hope to
make a comeback on the RTTY scene soon once I get a weekend where there is a
good test and not a CW test I am more interested in --- yep fell off the
Digi bandwagon and landed on the CW.. ;)


Jeremy
N4JIK formerly KD4LCR/7J6CEM
Fort Benning, GA/Phenix City, AL
Triple Play Award #327

"The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but
because he loves what is behind him." G. K. Chesterton




-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of W0MU Mike Fatchett
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 3:43 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

Please report him. I have heard this too. This is not a problem with SO2R
it is a problem with the operator. We don't remove cars from the road
because the speed or break the rules, they get tickets and their ability to
drive a car may be removed. Maybe this operator was at a station that could
have 6 bands going at once.

As already state folks use high power and claim less, use amps that put out
well over our legal limit etc. This has been going on for years and years.

As for getting spotting on his run frequency I have done it. If you use
N1MM and do not have the running box checked and have the spot new calls
going this will happen. If your spots window it might take a bit to notice.

W0MU



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 Don Hill AA5AU
Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 11:04 PM
Subject: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

As I tuned around the bands during the last 8 hour segment, I found a USA
SO2R station transmitting on both 15 and 20 meters at the same time in a
blatant violation of the rules. It wasn't a case of someone just making a
mistake. I watched for 15-20 minutes and simply couldn't believe what I was
seeing. I did let them know he or they were breaking the rules and he/they
immediately stopped.
But it made me mad.

Then a little while longer, I saw my call pop up on the bandmap on 20 meters
even though I was S&P on that band. At first I thought someone made a
mistake. Then I looked at the origin of the spot and realized it was a
station I had just worked. This operator spotted me on his run frequency.
Although that is not a direct violation of the rules, it still irked me.

I don't know how much of this goes on, but it needs to stop. The next time
I catch someone transmitting two signals at the same time, I will call them
out publicly on it. I realize there will be instances of stations
transmitting at the same time (Multi-2, Multi-Multi). But the rules of the
DLDC were specific:

4. GENERAL for all categories:

(e) Only one transmitted signal is permitted at any time.

As far as spotting other stations on one's run frequency, it's just the
wrong thing to do. There have been times, such as when I was on ten meters,
when I wanted to spot someone on my run frequency just to let everyone else
know the band was open. But I didn't. So don't get caught up in it.

There's been a lot of cheating going on in CW and SSB contests and it's
apparent there is cheating on RTTY too. I'm not sure what we can do about
it other than make it a point to let people know we aren't going to tolerate
it. I'm definitely not going to tolerate it.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>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

REPLY:

That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in
contests himself. :-) :-) :-)

Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have
more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does not appear
even once.

Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North
American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R contesting.
Period.

When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start
listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

> If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up and
> operate a full blown, legal limit SO2R, Thats fine.
> But don't expect to be in competition with someone of a more
> modest station.

How about, "If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up
multiple towers with multiple stacked arrays, that's fine. But don't
expect to be in competition with someone with a more modest station?

> The point of this whole thread and many more before it is simply,
> Make SO2R its own class.
> Do that, and we bring operator skill to an even fight.

That's BS - you don't even begin to bring operator skill to an "even
fight" unless you control for *ALL* - *100%* of the differences between
stations including antennas, receiver sensitivity, and geographical
differences. SO2R is only *ONE* component in the mix.

As Contesting Hall of Fame inductee AA5AU has stated publicly, he
started using SO2R to make up for the disadvantages he had in
antennas. There was no way he could compete with the stacks of
monoband antennas that dominated RTTY radiosport. I suspect the
same is true in other modes as well ... a well designed, modest
station with a couple of tribanders will allow a *SKILLED* operator
to compete on a more level playing field with a less skilled operator
who has bigger antennas and engages in "checkbook contesting."

Making SO2R its own class only serves to push operators who choose
one tool into a separate class. You, and others like you who would
destroy 60 years of contesting tradition, will still loose to the
deep pocket operators who can build multiple tower antenna farms.

However, I'll make you this offer ... if you are willing to convince
contest sponsors to create a class that excludes *BOTH* SO2R and any
antenna with more than 2.3 dBi gain in free space or more than 10
meters above ground, I'll happily support you in your effort to
"bring operator skill to an even fight." Otherwise, your argument
is nothing more than an attempt to use "operator skill" as a
codeword for "I don't like SO2R."

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 8:33 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
> Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>> > 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.
>>
>>
>
>> So If your Not saying it is Not an advantage, then you are agreeing
>> that a SO2R operator does have a edge.
> Then Fine, Let him keep the edge, but let him take it up against the
> skills of other SO2R stations.
> And let the SO1R take their skills, fairly, against other SO1R stations.
>
> If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up and operate
> a full blown, legal limit SO2R, Thats fine.
> But don't expect to be in competition with someone of a more modest
> station.
> The point of this whole thread and many more before it is simply,
> Make SO2R its own class.
> Do that, and we bring operator skill to an even fight.
>
> Mike WB9B
>
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. I see this has deteriorated into hostile territory. I should have known better. Next time I'll keep my thoughts to myself, report
the offender to the contest manager and post the offender on the Internet.

I think we can squelch this discussion now since it's gone beyond being productive.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>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

REPLY:

That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)

Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
not appear even once.

Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
contesting.
Period.

When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Thanks for the fun Don, Kinda like starting a riot then going home to
watch it on TV eh.
I'll stand with Bill, W6WRT on this one, And leave the lobbyists to
there own.

Cu in the next one, SO1R....
Mike WB9B



Don Hill AA5AU wrote:
> I see this has deteriorated into hostile territory. I should have known better. Next time I'll keep my thoughts to myself, report
> the offender to the contest manager and post the offender on the Internet.
>
> I think we can squelch this discussion now since it's gone beyond being productive.
>
> 73, Don AA5AU
> http://www.aa5au.com
> http://www.rttycontesting.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>
>> 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
>>
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
> not appear even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
> contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Of course Bill is a notoriously anti-technology and anti-SO2R
with nothing useful to add to the discussion. He's practiced
"if you don't like the message, attack the messenger" for a
long time.

Anyone who has changed calls recently and has no real antennas
in not likely to be in Bill's logs. I certainly don't find
W6WRT in the 25 - 35 year old logs from my very successful M/2
station back on Ohio.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>> 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
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
> not appear even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
> contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Bill and all,
With due respect what you are saying and NOT justifying W4TV, I checked my
Log and found W4TV 8 times confirmed QSL's in LoTW working him CW, SSB and
RTTY in 2006 and 2010 from US and Honduras.


> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
> >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
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in
> contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have
> more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does not appear
> even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North
> American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start
> listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

Bill,

On both counts, Thanks saying what needed to be said.


Mike WB9B
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,
Dont feel bad I too have done this on several occasions with N1MM so you are
not alone.

And just my two cents worth, I haven't done any RTTY contest lately because
I just got tired of putting up with all the violators, run freq grabbers,
and just generally unsportsman like behavior. I am by far and away a small
station, 100watts and wires, no amps -- just can't put it in the budget
right now. Not SO2R just plain ole the little guy. I did alright in the
contest I did participate in but just wanted to enjoy my contest not get run
over by someone running a bigger system than I am. And I agree 100 if
people are cheating then by god they should be reported.

And please for the love of god, give us little guys a chance and quit
running us off. I won't give the call but on three different occasions I
worked a RTTY tester who answered my run, thanked me then immediately took
off calling CQ on my freq. Same guy each time, hell he has probably been
mentioned here already --- oh yeah and these weren't Sprints either. Hope to
make a comeback on the RTTY scene soon once I get a weekend where there is a
good test and not a CW test I am more interested in --- yep fell off the
Digi bandwagon and landed on the CW.. ;)


Jeremy
N4JIK formerly KD4LCR/7J6CEM
Fort Benning, GA/Phenix City, AL
Triple Play Award #327

"The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but
because he loves what is behind him." G. K. Chesterton




-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of W0MU Mike Fatchett
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 3:43 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

Please report him. I have heard this too. This is not a problem with SO2R
it is a problem with the operator. We don't remove cars from the road
because the speed or break the rules, they get tickets and their ability to
drive a car may be removed. Maybe this operator was at a station that could
have 6 bands going at once.

As already state folks use high power and claim less, use amps that put out
well over our legal limit etc. This has been going on for years and years.

As for getting spotting on his run frequency I have done it. If you use
N1MM and do not have the running box checked and have the spot new calls
going this will happen. If your spots window it might take a bit to notice.

W0MU



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 Don Hill AA5AU
Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 11:04 PM
Subject: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

As I tuned around the bands during the last 8 hour segment, I found a USA
SO2R station transmitting on both 15 and 20 meters at the same time in a
blatant violation of the rules. It wasn't a case of someone just making a
mistake. I watched for 15-20 minutes and simply couldn't believe what I was
seeing. I did let them know he or they were breaking the rules and he/they
immediately stopped.
But it made me mad.

Then a little while longer, I saw my call pop up on the bandmap on 20 meters
even though I was S&P on that band. At first I thought someone made a
mistake. Then I looked at the origin of the spot and realized it was a
station I had just worked. This operator spotted me on his run frequency.
Although that is not a direct violation of the rules, it still irked me.

I don't know how much of this goes on, but it needs to stop. The next time
I catch someone transmitting two signals at the same time, I will call them
out publicly on it. I realize there will be instances of stations
transmitting at the same time (Multi-2, Multi-Multi). But the rules of the
DLDC were specific:

4. GENERAL for all categories:

(e) Only one transmitted signal is permitted at any time.

As far as spotting other stations on one's run frequency, it's just the
wrong thing to do. There have been times, such as when I was on ten meters,
when I wanted to spot someone on my run frequency just to let everyone else
know the band was open. But I didn't. So don't get caught up in it.

There's been a lot of cheating going on in CW and SSB contests and it's
apparent there is cheating on RTTY too. I'm not sure what we can do about
it other than make it a point to let people know we aren't going to tolerate
it. I'm definitely not going to tolerate it.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>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

REPLY:

That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in
contests himself. :-) :-) :-)

Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have
more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does not appear
even once.

Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North
American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R contesting.
Period.

When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start
listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

> If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up and
> operate a full blown, legal limit SO2R, Thats fine.
> But don't expect to be in competition with someone of a more
> modest station.

How about, "If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up
multiple towers with multiple stacked arrays, that's fine. But don't
expect to be in competition with someone with a more modest station?

> The point of this whole thread and many more before it is simply,
> Make SO2R its own class.
> Do that, and we bring operator skill to an even fight.

That's BS - you don't even begin to bring operator skill to an "even
fight" unless you control for *ALL* - *100%* of the differences between
stations including antennas, receiver sensitivity, and geographical
differences. SO2R is only *ONE* component in the mix.

As Contesting Hall of Fame inductee AA5AU has stated publicly, he
started using SO2R to make up for the disadvantages he had in
antennas. There was no way he could compete with the stacks of
monoband antennas that dominated RTTY radiosport. I suspect the
same is true in other modes as well ... a well designed, modest
station with a couple of tribanders will allow a *SKILLED* operator
to compete on a more level playing field with a less skilled operator
who has bigger antennas and engages in "checkbook contesting."

Making SO2R its own class only serves to push operators who choose
one tool into a separate class. You, and others like you who would
destroy 60 years of contesting tradition, will still loose to the
deep pocket operators who can build multiple tower antenna farms.

However, I'll make you this offer ... if you are willing to convince
contest sponsors to create a class that excludes *BOTH* SO2R and any
antenna with more than 2.3 dBi gain in free space or more than 10
meters above ground, I'll happily support you in your effort to
"bring operator skill to an even fight." Otherwise, your argument
is nothing more than an attempt to use "operator skill" as a
codeword for "I don't like SO2R."

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 8:33 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
> Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>> > 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.
>>
>>
>
>> So If your Not saying it is Not an advantage, then you are agreeing
>> that a SO2R operator does have a edge.
> Then Fine, Let him keep the edge, but let him take it up against the
> skills of other SO2R stations.
> And let the SO1R take their skills, fairly, against other SO1R stations.
>
> If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up and operate
> a full blown, legal limit SO2R, Thats fine.
> But don't expect to be in competition with someone of a more modest
> station.
> The point of this whole thread and many more before it is simply,
> Make SO2R its own class.
> Do that, and we bring operator skill to an even fight.
>
> Mike WB9B
>
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. I see this has deteriorated into hostile territory. I should have known better. Next time I'll keep my thoughts to myself, report
the offender to the contest manager and post the offender on the Internet.

I think we can squelch this discussion now since it's gone beyond being productive.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>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

REPLY:

That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)

Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
not appear even once.

Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
contesting.
Period.

When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Thanks for the fun Don, Kinda like starting a riot then going home to
watch it on TV eh.
I'll stand with Bill, W6WRT on this one, And leave the lobbyists to
there own.

Cu in the next one, SO1R....
Mike WB9B



Don Hill AA5AU wrote:
> I see this has deteriorated into hostile territory. I should have known better. Next time I'll keep my thoughts to myself, report
> the offender to the contest manager and post the offender on the Internet.
>
> I think we can squelch this discussion now since it's gone beyond being productive.
>
> 73, Don AA5AU
> http://www.aa5au.com
> http://www.rttycontesting.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>
>> 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
>>
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
> not appear even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
> contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Of course Bill is a notoriously anti-technology and anti-SO2R
with nothing useful to add to the discussion. He's practiced
"if you don't like the message, attack the messenger" for a
long time.

Anyone who has changed calls recently and has no real antennas
in not likely to be in Bill's logs. I certainly don't find
W6WRT in the 25 - 35 year old logs from my very successful M/2
station back on Ohio.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>> 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
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
> not appear even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
> contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Bill and all,
With due respect what you are saying and NOT justifying W4TV, I checked my
Log and found W4TV 8 times confirmed QSL's in LoTW working him CW, SSB and
RTTY in 2006 and 2010 from US and Honduras.


> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
> >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
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in
> contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have
> more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does not appear
> even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North
> American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start
> listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. > Knowing Joe as I do, he will no doubt argue that two radios is
> somehow different from two transmitters, but that's just
> hair-splitting rubbish.

Yes, there is a big difference between legal SO2R (one signal at
a time) and multi-transmitter (multiple signals at a time which
is what STARTED this thread). Of course, Bill knows the difference.

He simply lacks the intellectual honesty to admit the difference
and prefers to ignore any inconvenient fact as "rubbish."

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 8:22 PM, Bill, W6WRT wrote:
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:22:42 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>>
>> There is no contest that has a "multi-transmitter" class for single
>> operators.
>
> REPLY:
>
> Not so. The XE RTTY contest has separate classes for one and two
> radio operation.
>
> Knowing Joe as I do, he will no doubt argue that two radios is
> somehow different from two transmitters, but that's just
> hair-splitting rubbish.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

Bill,

On both counts, Thanks saying what needed to be said.


Mike WB9B
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,
Dont feel bad I too have done this on several occasions with N1MM so you are
not alone.

And just my two cents worth, I haven't done any RTTY contest lately because
I just got tired of putting up with all the violators, run freq grabbers,
and just generally unsportsman like behavior. I am by far and away a small
station, 100watts and wires, no amps -- just can't put it in the budget
right now. Not SO2R just plain ole the little guy. I did alright in the
contest I did participate in but just wanted to enjoy my contest not get run
over by someone running a bigger system than I am. And I agree 100 if
people are cheating then by god they should be reported.

And please for the love of god, give us little guys a chance and quit
running us off. I won't give the call but on three different occasions I
worked a RTTY tester who answered my run, thanked me then immediately took
off calling CQ on my freq. Same guy each time, hell he has probably been
mentioned here already --- oh yeah and these weren't Sprints either. Hope to
make a comeback on the RTTY scene soon once I get a weekend where there is a
good test and not a CW test I am more interested in --- yep fell off the
Digi bandwagon and landed on the CW.. ;)


Jeremy
N4JIK formerly KD4LCR/7J6CEM
Fort Benning, GA/Phenix City, AL
Triple Play Award #327

"The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but
because he loves what is behind him." G. K. Chesterton




-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of W0MU Mike Fatchett
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 3:43 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

Please report him. I have heard this too. This is not a problem with SO2R
it is a problem with the operator. We don't remove cars from the road
because the speed or break the rules, they get tickets and their ability to
drive a car may be removed. Maybe this operator was at a station that could
have 6 bands going at once.

As already state folks use high power and claim less, use amps that put out
well over our legal limit etc. This has been going on for years and years.

As for getting spotting on his run frequency I have done it. If you use
N1MM and do not have the running box checked and have the spot new calls
going this will happen. If your spots window it might take a bit to notice.

W0MU



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 Don Hill AA5AU
Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 11:04 PM
Subject: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

As I tuned around the bands during the last 8 hour segment, I found a USA
SO2R station transmitting on both 15 and 20 meters at the same time in a
blatant violation of the rules. It wasn't a case of someone just making a
mistake. I watched for 15-20 minutes and simply couldn't believe what I was
seeing. I did let them know he or they were breaking the rules and he/they
immediately stopped.
But it made me mad.

Then a little while longer, I saw my call pop up on the bandmap on 20 meters
even though I was S&P on that band. At first I thought someone made a
mistake. Then I looked at the origin of the spot and realized it was a
station I had just worked. This operator spotted me on his run frequency.
Although that is not a direct violation of the rules, it still irked me.

I don't know how much of this goes on, but it needs to stop. The next time
I catch someone transmitting two signals at the same time, I will call them
out publicly on it. I realize there will be instances of stations
transmitting at the same time (Multi-2, Multi-Multi). But the rules of the
DLDC were specific:

4. GENERAL for all categories:

(e) Only one transmitted signal is permitted at any time.

As far as spotting other stations on one's run frequency, it's just the
wrong thing to do. There have been times, such as when I was on ten meters,
when I wanted to spot someone on my run frequency just to let everyone else
know the band was open. But I didn't. So don't get caught up in it.

There's been a lot of cheating going on in CW and SSB contests and it's
apparent there is cheating on RTTY too. I'm not sure what we can do about
it other than make it a point to let people know we aren't going to tolerate
it. I'm definitely not going to tolerate it.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>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

REPLY:

That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in
contests himself. :-) :-) :-)

Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have
more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does not appear
even once.

Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North
American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R contesting.
Period.

When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start
listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

> If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up and
> operate a full blown, legal limit SO2R, Thats fine.
> But don't expect to be in competition with someone of a more
> modest station.

How about, "If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up
multiple towers with multiple stacked arrays, that's fine. But don't
expect to be in competition with someone with a more modest station?

> The point of this whole thread and many more before it is simply,
> Make SO2R its own class.
> Do that, and we bring operator skill to an even fight.

That's BS - you don't even begin to bring operator skill to an "even
fight" unless you control for *ALL* - *100%* of the differences between
stations including antennas, receiver sensitivity, and geographical
differences. SO2R is only *ONE* component in the mix.

As Contesting Hall of Fame inductee AA5AU has stated publicly, he
started using SO2R to make up for the disadvantages he had in
antennas. There was no way he could compete with the stacks of
monoband antennas that dominated RTTY radiosport. I suspect the
same is true in other modes as well ... a well designed, modest
station with a couple of tribanders will allow a *SKILLED* operator
to compete on a more level playing field with a less skilled operator
who has bigger antennas and engages in "checkbook contesting."

Making SO2R its own class only serves to push operators who choose
one tool into a separate class. You, and others like you who would
destroy 60 years of contesting tradition, will still loose to the
deep pocket operators who can build multiple tower antenna farms.

However, I'll make you this offer ... if you are willing to convince
contest sponsors to create a class that excludes *BOTH* SO2R and any
antenna with more than 2.3 dBi gain in free space or more than 10
meters above ground, I'll happily support you in your effort to
"bring operator skill to an even fight." Otherwise, your argument
is nothing more than an attempt to use "operator skill" as a
codeword for "I don't like SO2R."

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 8:33 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
> Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>> > 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.
>>
>>
>
>> So If your Not saying it is Not an advantage, then you are agreeing
>> that a SO2R operator does have a edge.
> Then Fine, Let him keep the edge, but let him take it up against the
> skills of other SO2R stations.
> And let the SO1R take their skills, fairly, against other SO1R stations.
>
> If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up and operate
> a full blown, legal limit SO2R, Thats fine.
> But don't expect to be in competition with someone of a more modest
> station.
> The point of this whole thread and many more before it is simply,
> Make SO2R its own class.
> Do that, and we bring operator skill to an even fight.
>
> Mike WB9B
>
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. I see this has deteriorated into hostile territory. I should have known better. Next time I'll keep my thoughts to myself, report
the offender to the contest manager and post the offender on the Internet.

I think we can squelch this discussion now since it's gone beyond being productive.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>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

REPLY:

That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)

Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
not appear even once.

Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
contesting.
Period.

When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Thanks for the fun Don, Kinda like starting a riot then going home to
watch it on TV eh.
I'll stand with Bill, W6WRT on this one, And leave the lobbyists to
there own.

Cu in the next one, SO1R....
Mike WB9B



Don Hill AA5AU wrote:
> I see this has deteriorated into hostile territory. I should have known better. Next time I'll keep my thoughts to myself, report
> the offender to the contest manager and post the offender on the Internet.
>
> I think we can squelch this discussion now since it's gone beyond being productive.
>
> 73, Don AA5AU
> http://www.aa5au.com
> http://www.rttycontesting.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>
>> 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
>>
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
> not appear even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
> contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Of course Bill is a notoriously anti-technology and anti-SO2R
with nothing useful to add to the discussion. He's practiced
"if you don't like the message, attack the messenger" for a
long time.

Anyone who has changed calls recently and has no real antennas
in not likely to be in Bill's logs. I certainly don't find
W6WRT in the 25 - 35 year old logs from my very successful M/2
station back on Ohio.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>> 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
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
> not appear even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
> contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Bill and all,
With due respect what you are saying and NOT justifying W4TV, I checked my
Log and found W4TV 8 times confirmed QSL's in LoTW working him CW, SSB and
RTTY in 2006 and 2010 from US and Honduras.


> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
> >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
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in
> contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have
> more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does not appear
> even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North
> American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start
> listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. > Knowing Joe as I do, he will no doubt argue that two radios is
> somehow different from two transmitters, but that's just
> hair-splitting rubbish.

Yes, there is a big difference between legal SO2R (one signal at
a time) and multi-transmitter (multiple signals at a time which
is what STARTED this thread). Of course, Bill knows the difference.

He simply lacks the intellectual honesty to admit the difference
and prefers to ignore any inconvenient fact as "rubbish."

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 8:22 PM, Bill, W6WRT wrote:
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:22:42 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>>
>> There is no contest that has a "multi-transmitter" class for single
>> operators.
>
> REPLY:
>
> Not so. The XE RTTY contest has separate classes for one and two
> radio operation.
>
> Knowing Joe as I do, he will no doubt argue that two radios is
> somehow different from two transmitters, but that's just
> hair-splitting rubbish.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. > Nowhere else? Did you forget about separation by power class or number
> of operators?

Number of operators is multi-operator - not single operator. SO2R is
not an applicable issue in multi-operator classes. Beside that when
did operators become "hardware?"

As to power, that's not specifically hardware ... and is one of the few
reasonable and truly measurable differentiation.

By the way Bill, you never did agree to promote a real separation of
operator skill and hardware - you were not willing to give up your
antennas. Until you're willing to do so, you can do all the name
calling you like but it doesn't change the fact that you are simply
an anti-SO2R bigot.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 8:17 PM, Bill, W6WRT wrote:
> 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.

Bill,

On both counts, Thanks saying what needed to be said.


Mike WB9B
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,
Dont feel bad I too have done this on several occasions with N1MM so you are
not alone.

And just my two cents worth, I haven't done any RTTY contest lately because
I just got tired of putting up with all the violators, run freq grabbers,
and just generally unsportsman like behavior. I am by far and away a small
station, 100watts and wires, no amps -- just can't put it in the budget
right now. Not SO2R just plain ole the little guy. I did alright in the
contest I did participate in but just wanted to enjoy my contest not get run
over by someone running a bigger system than I am. And I agree 100 if
people are cheating then by god they should be reported.

And please for the love of god, give us little guys a chance and quit
running us off. I won't give the call but on three different occasions I
worked a RTTY tester who answered my run, thanked me then immediately took
off calling CQ on my freq. Same guy each time, hell he has probably been
mentioned here already --- oh yeah and these weren't Sprints either. Hope to
make a comeback on the RTTY scene soon once I get a weekend where there is a
good test and not a CW test I am more interested in --- yep fell off the
Digi bandwagon and landed on the CW.. ;)


Jeremy
N4JIK formerly KD4LCR/7J6CEM
Fort Benning, GA/Phenix City, AL
Triple Play Award #327

"The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but
because he loves what is behind him." G. K. Chesterton




-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of W0MU Mike Fatchett
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 3:43 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

Please report him. I have heard this too. This is not a problem with SO2R
it is a problem with the operator. We don't remove cars from the road
because the speed or break the rules, they get tickets and their ability to
drive a car may be removed. Maybe this operator was at a station that could
have 6 bands going at once.

As already state folks use high power and claim less, use amps that put out
well over our legal limit etc. This has been going on for years and years.

As for getting spotting on his run frequency I have done it. If you use
N1MM and do not have the running box checked and have the spot new calls
going this will happen. If your spots window it might take a bit to notice.

W0MU



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 Don Hill AA5AU
Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 11:04 PM
Subject: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

As I tuned around the bands during the last 8 hour segment, I found a USA
SO2R station transmitting on both 15 and 20 meters at the same time in a
blatant violation of the rules. It wasn't a case of someone just making a
mistake. I watched for 15-20 minutes and simply couldn't believe what I was
seeing. I did let them know he or they were breaking the rules and he/they
immediately stopped.
But it made me mad.

Then a little while longer, I saw my call pop up on the bandmap on 20 meters
even though I was S&P on that band. At first I thought someone made a
mistake. Then I looked at the origin of the spot and realized it was a
station I had just worked. This operator spotted me on his run frequency.
Although that is not a direct violation of the rules, it still irked me.

I don't know how much of this goes on, but it needs to stop. The next time
I catch someone transmitting two signals at the same time, I will call them
out publicly on it. I realize there will be instances of stations
transmitting at the same time (Multi-2, Multi-Multi). But the rules of the
DLDC were specific:

4. GENERAL for all categories:

(e) Only one transmitted signal is permitted at any time.

As far as spotting other stations on one's run frequency, it's just the
wrong thing to do. There have been times, such as when I was on ten meters,
when I wanted to spot someone on my run frequency just to let everyone else
know the band was open. But I didn't. So don't get caught up in it.

There's been a lot of cheating going on in CW and SSB contests and it's
apparent there is cheating on RTTY too. I'm not sure what we can do about
it other than make it a point to let people know we aren't going to tolerate
it. I'm definitely not going to tolerate it.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>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

REPLY:

That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in
contests himself. :-) :-) :-)

Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have
more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does not appear
even once.

Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North
American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R contesting.
Period.

When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start
listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

> If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up and
> operate a full blown, legal limit SO2R, Thats fine.
> But don't expect to be in competition with someone of a more
> modest station.

How about, "If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up
multiple towers with multiple stacked arrays, that's fine. But don't
expect to be in competition with someone with a more modest station?

> The point of this whole thread and many more before it is simply,
> Make SO2R its own class.
> Do that, and we bring operator skill to an even fight.

That's BS - you don't even begin to bring operator skill to an "even
fight" unless you control for *ALL* - *100%* of the differences between
stations including antennas, receiver sensitivity, and geographical
differences. SO2R is only *ONE* component in the mix.

As Contesting Hall of Fame inductee AA5AU has stated publicly, he
started using SO2R to make up for the disadvantages he had in
antennas. There was no way he could compete with the stacks of
monoband antennas that dominated RTTY radiosport. I suspect the
same is true in other modes as well ... a well designed, modest
station with a couple of tribanders will allow a *SKILLED* operator
to compete on a more level playing field with a less skilled operator
who has bigger antennas and engages in "checkbook contesting."

Making SO2R its own class only serves to push operators who choose
one tool into a separate class. You, and others like you who would
destroy 60 years of contesting tradition, will still loose to the
deep pocket operators who can build multiple tower antenna farms.

However, I'll make you this offer ... if you are willing to convince
contest sponsors to create a class that excludes *BOTH* SO2R and any
antenna with more than 2.3 dBi gain in free space or more than 10
meters above ground, I'll happily support you in your effort to
"bring operator skill to an even fight." Otherwise, your argument
is nothing more than an attempt to use "operator skill" as a
codeword for "I don't like SO2R."

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 8:33 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
> Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>> > 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.
>>
>>
>
>> So If your Not saying it is Not an advantage, then you are agreeing
>> that a SO2R operator does have a edge.
> Then Fine, Let him keep the edge, but let him take it up against the
> skills of other SO2R stations.
> And let the SO1R take their skills, fairly, against other SO1R stations.
>
> If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up and operate
> a full blown, legal limit SO2R, Thats fine.
> But don't expect to be in competition with someone of a more modest
> station.
> The point of this whole thread and many more before it is simply,
> Make SO2R its own class.
> Do that, and we bring operator skill to an even fight.
>
> Mike WB9B
>
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. I see this has deteriorated into hostile territory. I should have known better. Next time I'll keep my thoughts to myself, report
the offender to the contest manager and post the offender on the Internet.

I think we can squelch this discussion now since it's gone beyond being productive.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>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

REPLY:

That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)

Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
not appear even once.

Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
contesting.
Period.

When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Thanks for the fun Don, Kinda like starting a riot then going home to
watch it on TV eh.
I'll stand with Bill, W6WRT on this one, And leave the lobbyists to
there own.

Cu in the next one, SO1R....
Mike WB9B



Don Hill AA5AU wrote:
> I see this has deteriorated into hostile territory. I should have known better. Next time I'll keep my thoughts to myself, report
> the offender to the contest manager and post the offender on the Internet.
>
> I think we can squelch this discussion now since it's gone beyond being productive.
>
> 73, Don AA5AU
> http://www.aa5au.com
> http://www.rttycontesting.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>
>> 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
>>
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
> not appear even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
> contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Of course Bill is a notoriously anti-technology and anti-SO2R
with nothing useful to add to the discussion. He's practiced
"if you don't like the message, attack the messenger" for a
long time.

Anyone who has changed calls recently and has no real antennas
in not likely to be in Bill's logs. I certainly don't find
W6WRT in the 25 - 35 year old logs from my very successful M/2
station back on Ohio.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>> 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
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
> not appear even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
> contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Bill and all,
With due respect what you are saying and NOT justifying W4TV, I checked my
Log and found W4TV 8 times confirmed QSL's in LoTW working him CW, SSB and
RTTY in 2006 and 2010 from US and Honduras.


> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
> >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
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in
> contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have
> more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does not appear
> even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North
> American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start
> listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. > Knowing Joe as I do, he will no doubt argue that two radios is
> somehow different from two transmitters, but that's just
> hair-splitting rubbish.

Yes, there is a big difference between legal SO2R (one signal at
a time) and multi-transmitter (multiple signals at a time which
is what STARTED this thread). Of course, Bill knows the difference.

He simply lacks the intellectual honesty to admit the difference
and prefers to ignore any inconvenient fact as "rubbish."

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 8:22 PM, Bill, W6WRT wrote:
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:22:42 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>>
>> There is no contest that has a "multi-transmitter" class for single
>> operators.
>
> REPLY:
>
> Not so. The XE RTTY contest has separate classes for one and two
> radio operation.
>
> Knowing Joe as I do, he will no doubt argue that two radios is
> somehow different from two transmitters, but that's just
> hair-splitting rubbish.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. > Nowhere else? Did you forget about separation by power class or number
> of operators?

Number of operators is multi-operator - not single operator. SO2R is
not an applicable issue in multi-operator classes. Beside that when
did operators become "hardware?"

As to power, that's not specifically hardware ... and is one of the few
reasonable and truly measurable differentiation.

By the way Bill, you never did agree to promote a real separation of
operator skill and hardware - you were not willing to give up your
antennas. Until you're willing to do so, you can do all the name
calling you like but it doesn't change the fact that you are simply
an anti-SO2R bigot.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 8:17 PM, Bill, W6WRT wrote:
> 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. I guess we need a category for single radio multiple decoders too? Isn't
this a big advantage? Where exactly do you draw the line and how?

It takes great skill to be able to do SO2R competitively. Hardware is just
one piece that makes it easier. It is the grey stuff between the ears that
allows an operator to excel, especially on CW and SSB. A lousy op is not
going to win the next big contest by adding a 2nd rig/xmitter/etc.

RTTY SO2R is a natural as you have so much time waiting as you xmit. I
don't know how people did RTTY contests before SO2R. I would have been
bored to death waiting anxiously for my rig to unkey.

W0MU

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




_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

Bill,

On both counts, Thanks saying what needed to be said.


Mike WB9B
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,
Dont feel bad I too have done this on several occasions with N1MM so you are
not alone.

And just my two cents worth, I haven't done any RTTY contest lately because
I just got tired of putting up with all the violators, run freq grabbers,
and just generally unsportsman like behavior. I am by far and away a small
station, 100watts and wires, no amps -- just can't put it in the budget
right now. Not SO2R just plain ole the little guy. I did alright in the
contest I did participate in but just wanted to enjoy my contest not get run
over by someone running a bigger system than I am. And I agree 100 if
people are cheating then by god they should be reported.

And please for the love of god, give us little guys a chance and quit
running us off. I won't give the call but on three different occasions I
worked a RTTY tester who answered my run, thanked me then immediately took
off calling CQ on my freq. Same guy each time, hell he has probably been
mentioned here already --- oh yeah and these weren't Sprints either. Hope to
make a comeback on the RTTY scene soon once I get a weekend where there is a
good test and not a CW test I am more interested in --- yep fell off the
Digi bandwagon and landed on the CW.. ;)


Jeremy
N4JIK formerly KD4LCR/7J6CEM
Fort Benning, GA/Phenix City, AL
Triple Play Award #327

"The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but
because he loves what is behind him." G. K. Chesterton




-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of W0MU Mike Fatchett
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 3:43 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

Please report him. I have heard this too. This is not a problem with SO2R
it is a problem with the operator. We don't remove cars from the road
because the speed or break the rules, they get tickets and their ability to
drive a car may be removed. Maybe this operator was at a station that could
have 6 bands going at once.

As already state folks use high power and claim less, use amps that put out
well over our legal limit etc. This has been going on for years and years.

As for getting spotting on his run frequency I have done it. If you use
N1MM and do not have the running box checked and have the spot new calls
going this will happen. If your spots window it might take a bit to notice.

W0MU



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 Don Hill AA5AU
Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 11:04 PM
Subject: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

As I tuned around the bands during the last 8 hour segment, I found a USA
SO2R station transmitting on both 15 and 20 meters at the same time in a
blatant violation of the rules. It wasn't a case of someone just making a
mistake. I watched for 15-20 minutes and simply couldn't believe what I was
seeing. I did let them know he or they were breaking the rules and he/they
immediately stopped.
But it made me mad.

Then a little while longer, I saw my call pop up on the bandmap on 20 meters
even though I was S&P on that band. At first I thought someone made a
mistake. Then I looked at the origin of the spot and realized it was a
station I had just worked. This operator spotted me on his run frequency.
Although that is not a direct violation of the rules, it still irked me.

I don't know how much of this goes on, but it needs to stop. The next time
I catch someone transmitting two signals at the same time, I will call them
out publicly on it. I realize there will be instances of stations
transmitting at the same time (Multi-2, Multi-Multi). But the rules of the
DLDC were specific:

4. GENERAL for all categories:

(e) Only one transmitted signal is permitted at any time.

As far as spotting other stations on one's run frequency, it's just the
wrong thing to do. There have been times, such as when I was on ten meters,
when I wanted to spot someone on my run frequency just to let everyone else
know the band was open. But I didn't. So don't get caught up in it.

There's been a lot of cheating going on in CW and SSB contests and it's
apparent there is cheating on RTTY too. I'm not sure what we can do about
it other than make it a point to let people know we aren't going to tolerate
it. I'm definitely not going to tolerate it.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>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

REPLY:

That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in
contests himself. :-) :-) :-)

Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have
more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does not appear
even once.

Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North
American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R contesting.
Period.

When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start
listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

> If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up and
> operate a full blown, legal limit SO2R, Thats fine.
> But don't expect to be in competition with someone of a more
> modest station.

How about, "If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up
multiple towers with multiple stacked arrays, that's fine. But don't
expect to be in competition with someone with a more modest station?

> The point of this whole thread and many more before it is simply,
> Make SO2R its own class.
> Do that, and we bring operator skill to an even fight.

That's BS - you don't even begin to bring operator skill to an "even
fight" unless you control for *ALL* - *100%* of the differences between
stations including antennas, receiver sensitivity, and geographical
differences. SO2R is only *ONE* component in the mix.

As Contesting Hall of Fame inductee AA5AU has stated publicly, he
started using SO2R to make up for the disadvantages he had in
antennas. There was no way he could compete with the stacks of
monoband antennas that dominated RTTY radiosport. I suspect the
same is true in other modes as well ... a well designed, modest
station with a couple of tribanders will allow a *SKILLED* operator
to compete on a more level playing field with a less skilled operator
who has bigger antennas and engages in "checkbook contesting."

Making SO2R its own class only serves to push operators who choose
one tool into a separate class. You, and others like you who would
destroy 60 years of contesting tradition, will still loose to the
deep pocket operators who can build multiple tower antenna farms.

However, I'll make you this offer ... if you are willing to convince
contest sponsors to create a class that excludes *BOTH* SO2R and any
antenna with more than 2.3 dBi gain in free space or more than 10
meters above ground, I'll happily support you in your effort to
"bring operator skill to an even fight." Otherwise, your argument
is nothing more than an attempt to use "operator skill" as a
codeword for "I don't like SO2R."

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 8:33 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
> Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>> > 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.
>>
>>
>
>> So If your Not saying it is Not an advantage, then you are agreeing
>> that a SO2R operator does have a edge.
> Then Fine, Let him keep the edge, but let him take it up against the
> skills of other SO2R stations.
> And let the SO1R take their skills, fairly, against other SO1R stations.
>
> If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up and operate
> a full blown, legal limit SO2R, Thats fine.
> But don't expect to be in competition with someone of a more modest
> station.
> The point of this whole thread and many more before it is simply,
> Make SO2R its own class.
> Do that, and we bring operator skill to an even fight.
>
> Mike WB9B
>
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. I see this has deteriorated into hostile territory. I should have known better. Next time I'll keep my thoughts to myself, report
the offender to the contest manager and post the offender on the Internet.

I think we can squelch this discussion now since it's gone beyond being productive.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>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

REPLY:

That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)

Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
not appear even once.

Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
contesting.
Period.

When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Thanks for the fun Don, Kinda like starting a riot then going home to
watch it on TV eh.
I'll stand with Bill, W6WRT on this one, And leave the lobbyists to
there own.

Cu in the next one, SO1R....
Mike WB9B



Don Hill AA5AU wrote:
> I see this has deteriorated into hostile territory. I should have known better. Next time I'll keep my thoughts to myself, report
> the offender to the contest manager and post the offender on the Internet.
>
> I think we can squelch this discussion now since it's gone beyond being productive.
>
> 73, Don AA5AU
> http://www.aa5au.com
> http://www.rttycontesting.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>
>> 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
>>
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
> not appear even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
> contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Of course Bill is a notoriously anti-technology and anti-SO2R
with nothing useful to add to the discussion. He's practiced
"if you don't like the message, attack the messenger" for a
long time.

Anyone who has changed calls recently and has no real antennas
in not likely to be in Bill's logs. I certainly don't find
W6WRT in the 25 - 35 year old logs from my very successful M/2
station back on Ohio.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>> 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
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
> not appear even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
> contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Bill and all,
With due respect what you are saying and NOT justifying W4TV, I checked my
Log and found W4TV 8 times confirmed QSL's in LoTW working him CW, SSB and
RTTY in 2006 and 2010 from US and Honduras.


> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
> >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
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in
> contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have
> more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does not appear
> even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North
> American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start
> listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. > Knowing Joe as I do, he will no doubt argue that two radios is
> somehow different from two transmitters, but that's just
> hair-splitting rubbish.

Yes, there is a big difference between legal SO2R (one signal at
a time) and multi-transmitter (multiple signals at a time which
is what STARTED this thread). Of course, Bill knows the difference.

He simply lacks the intellectual honesty to admit the difference
and prefers to ignore any inconvenient fact as "rubbish."

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 8:22 PM, Bill, W6WRT wrote:
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:22:42 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>>
>> There is no contest that has a "multi-transmitter" class for single
>> operators.
>
> REPLY:
>
> Not so. The XE RTTY contest has separate classes for one and two
> radio operation.
>
> Knowing Joe as I do, he will no doubt argue that two radios is
> somehow different from two transmitters, but that's just
> hair-splitting rubbish.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. > Nowhere else? Did you forget about separation by power class or number
> of operators?

Number of operators is multi-operator - not single operator. SO2R is
not an applicable issue in multi-operator classes. Beside that when
did operators become "hardware?"

As to power, that's not specifically hardware ... and is one of the few
reasonable and truly measurable differentiation.

By the way Bill, you never did agree to promote a real separation of
operator skill and hardware - you were not willing to give up your
antennas. Until you're willing to do so, you can do all the name
calling you like but it doesn't change the fact that you are simply
an anti-SO2R bigot.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 8:17 PM, Bill, W6WRT wrote:
> 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. I guess we need a category for single radio multiple decoders too? Isn't
this a big advantage? Where exactly do you draw the line and how?

It takes great skill to be able to do SO2R competitively. Hardware is just
one piece that makes it easier. It is the grey stuff between the ears that
allows an operator to excel, especially on CW and SSB. A lousy op is not
going to win the next big contest by adding a 2nd rig/xmitter/etc.

RTTY SO2R is a natural as you have so much time waiting as you xmit. I
don't know how people did RTTY contests before SO2R. I would have been
bored to death waiting anxiously for my rig to unkey.

W0MU

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




_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. >From Bill: Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you find?

Bill, I found Joe using his current call W4TV in my contest logs and LoTW
and I am sure I have him in my logs with him using a previous call, only I
forget what his old call was.

Personally Bill, I find you asking as to which products Joe sells a darn
right hit below the belt. I have seen Joe on this reflector and countless
other reflectors never pushing his wares. In fact a good many times I have
seen Joe helping us Hams with products he has absolutely no monetary
interest in, AKA the competition.

Eric - VE3GSI



-----Original Message-----
Sent: June-14-10 8:18 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

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.

Bill,

On both counts, Thanks saying what needed to be said.


Mike WB9B
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,
Dont feel bad I too have done this on several occasions with N1MM so you are
not alone.

And just my two cents worth, I haven't done any RTTY contest lately because
I just got tired of putting up with all the violators, run freq grabbers,
and just generally unsportsman like behavior. I am by far and away a small
station, 100watts and wires, no amps -- just can't put it in the budget
right now. Not SO2R just plain ole the little guy. I did alright in the
contest I did participate in but just wanted to enjoy my contest not get run
over by someone running a bigger system than I am. And I agree 100 if
people are cheating then by god they should be reported.

And please for the love of god, give us little guys a chance and quit
running us off. I won't give the call but on three different occasions I
worked a RTTY tester who answered my run, thanked me then immediately took
off calling CQ on my freq. Same guy each time, hell he has probably been
mentioned here already --- oh yeah and these weren't Sprints either. Hope to
make a comeback on the RTTY scene soon once I get a weekend where there is a
good test and not a CW test I am more interested in --- yep fell off the
Digi bandwagon and landed on the CW.. ;)


Jeremy
N4JIK formerly KD4LCR/7J6CEM
Fort Benning, GA/Phenix City, AL
Triple Play Award #327

"The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but
because he loves what is behind him." G. K. Chesterton




-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of W0MU Mike Fatchett
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 3:43 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

Please report him. I have heard this too. This is not a problem with SO2R
it is a problem with the operator. We don't remove cars from the road
because the speed or break the rules, they get tickets and their ability to
drive a car may be removed. Maybe this operator was at a station that could
have 6 bands going at once.

As already state folks use high power and claim less, use amps that put out
well over our legal limit etc. This has been going on for years and years.

As for getting spotting on his run frequency I have done it. If you use
N1MM and do not have the running box checked and have the spot new calls
going this will happen. If your spots window it might take a bit to notice.

W0MU



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 Don Hill AA5AU
Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 11:04 PM
Subject: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

As I tuned around the bands during the last 8 hour segment, I found a USA
SO2R station transmitting on both 15 and 20 meters at the same time in a
blatant violation of the rules. It wasn't a case of someone just making a
mistake. I watched for 15-20 minutes and simply couldn't believe what I was
seeing. I did let them know he or they were breaking the rules and he/they
immediately stopped.
But it made me mad.

Then a little while longer, I saw my call pop up on the bandmap on 20 meters
even though I was S&P on that band. At first I thought someone made a
mistake. Then I looked at the origin of the spot and realized it was a
station I had just worked. This operator spotted me on his run frequency.
Although that is not a direct violation of the rules, it still irked me.

I don't know how much of this goes on, but it needs to stop. The next time
I catch someone transmitting two signals at the same time, I will call them
out publicly on it. I realize there will be instances of stations
transmitting at the same time (Multi-2, Multi-Multi). But the rules of the
DLDC were specific:

4. GENERAL for all categories:

(e) Only one transmitted signal is permitted at any time.

As far as spotting other stations on one's run frequency, it's just the
wrong thing to do. There have been times, such as when I was on ten meters,
when I wanted to spot someone on my run frequency just to let everyone else
know the band was open. But I didn't. So don't get caught up in it.

There's been a lot of cheating going on in CW and SSB contests and it's
apparent there is cheating on RTTY too. I'm not sure what we can do about
it other than make it a point to let people know we aren't going to tolerate
it. I'm definitely not going to tolerate it.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>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

REPLY:

That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in
contests himself. :-) :-) :-)

Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have
more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does not appear
even once.

Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North
American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R contesting.
Period.

When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start
listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

> If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up and
> operate a full blown, legal limit SO2R, Thats fine.
> But don't expect to be in competition with someone of a more
> modest station.

How about, "If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up
multiple towers with multiple stacked arrays, that's fine. But don't
expect to be in competition with someone with a more modest station?

> The point of this whole thread and many more before it is simply,
> Make SO2R its own class.
> Do that, and we bring operator skill to an even fight.

That's BS - you don't even begin to bring operator skill to an "even
fight" unless you control for *ALL* - *100%* of the differences between
stations including antennas, receiver sensitivity, and geographical
differences. SO2R is only *ONE* component in the mix.

As Contesting Hall of Fame inductee AA5AU has stated publicly, he
started using SO2R to make up for the disadvantages he had in
antennas. There was no way he could compete with the stacks of
monoband antennas that dominated RTTY radiosport. I suspect the
same is true in other modes as well ... a well designed, modest
station with a couple of tribanders will allow a *SKILLED* operator
to compete on a more level playing field with a less skilled operator
who has bigger antennas and engages in "checkbook contesting."

Making SO2R its own class only serves to push operators who choose
one tool into a separate class. You, and others like you who would
destroy 60 years of contesting tradition, will still loose to the
deep pocket operators who can build multiple tower antenna farms.

However, I'll make you this offer ... if you are willing to convince
contest sponsors to create a class that excludes *BOTH* SO2R and any
antenna with more than 2.3 dBi gain in free space or more than 10
meters above ground, I'll happily support you in your effort to
"bring operator skill to an even fight." Otherwise, your argument
is nothing more than an attempt to use "operator skill" as a
codeword for "I don't like SO2R."

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 8:33 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
> Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>> > 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.
>>
>>
>
>> So If your Not saying it is Not an advantage, then you are agreeing
>> that a SO2R operator does have a edge.
> Then Fine, Let him keep the edge, but let him take it up against the
> skills of other SO2R stations.
> And let the SO1R take their skills, fairly, against other SO1R stations.
>
> If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up and operate
> a full blown, legal limit SO2R, Thats fine.
> But don't expect to be in competition with someone of a more modest
> station.
> The point of this whole thread and many more before it is simply,
> Make SO2R its own class.
> Do that, and we bring operator skill to an even fight.
>
> Mike WB9B
>
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. I see this has deteriorated into hostile territory. I should have known better. Next time I'll keep my thoughts to myself, report
the offender to the contest manager and post the offender on the Internet.

I think we can squelch this discussion now since it's gone beyond being productive.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>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

REPLY:

That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)

Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
not appear even once.

Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
contesting.
Period.

When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Thanks for the fun Don, Kinda like starting a riot then going home to
watch it on TV eh.
I'll stand with Bill, W6WRT on this one, And leave the lobbyists to
there own.

Cu in the next one, SO1R....
Mike WB9B



Don Hill AA5AU wrote:
> I see this has deteriorated into hostile territory. I should have known better. Next time I'll keep my thoughts to myself, report
> the offender to the contest manager and post the offender on the Internet.
>
> I think we can squelch this discussion now since it's gone beyond being productive.
>
> 73, Don AA5AU
> http://www.aa5au.com
> http://www.rttycontesting.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>
>> 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
>>
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
> not appear even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
> contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Of course Bill is a notoriously anti-technology and anti-SO2R
with nothing useful to add to the discussion. He's practiced
"if you don't like the message, attack the messenger" for a
long time.

Anyone who has changed calls recently and has no real antennas
in not likely to be in Bill's logs. I certainly don't find
W6WRT in the 25 - 35 year old logs from my very successful M/2
station back on Ohio.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>> 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
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
> not appear even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
> contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Bill and all,
With due respect what you are saying and NOT justifying W4TV, I checked my
Log and found W4TV 8 times confirmed QSL's in LoTW working him CW, SSB and
RTTY in 2006 and 2010 from US and Honduras.


> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
> >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
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in
> contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have
> more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does not appear
> even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North
> American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start
> listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. > Knowing Joe as I do, he will no doubt argue that two radios is
> somehow different from two transmitters, but that's just
> hair-splitting rubbish.

Yes, there is a big difference between legal SO2R (one signal at
a time) and multi-transmitter (multiple signals at a time which
is what STARTED this thread). Of course, Bill knows the difference.

He simply lacks the intellectual honesty to admit the difference
and prefers to ignore any inconvenient fact as "rubbish."

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 8:22 PM, Bill, W6WRT wrote:
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:22:42 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>>
>> There is no contest that has a "multi-transmitter" class for single
>> operators.
>
> REPLY:
>
> Not so. The XE RTTY contest has separate classes for one and two
> radio operation.
>
> Knowing Joe as I do, he will no doubt argue that two radios is
> somehow different from two transmitters, but that's just
> hair-splitting rubbish.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. > Nowhere else? Did you forget about separation by power class or number
> of operators?

Number of operators is multi-operator - not single operator. SO2R is
not an applicable issue in multi-operator classes. Beside that when
did operators become "hardware?"

As to power, that's not specifically hardware ... and is one of the few
reasonable and truly measurable differentiation.

By the way Bill, you never did agree to promote a real separation of
operator skill and hardware - you were not willing to give up your
antennas. Until you're willing to do so, you can do all the name
calling you like but it doesn't change the fact that you are simply
an anti-SO2R bigot.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 8:17 PM, Bill, W6WRT wrote:
> 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. I guess we need a category for single radio multiple decoders too? Isn't
this a big advantage? Where exactly do you draw the line and how?

It takes great skill to be able to do SO2R competitively. Hardware is just
one piece that makes it easier. It is the grey stuff between the ears that
allows an operator to excel, especially on CW and SSB. A lousy op is not
going to win the next big contest by adding a 2nd rig/xmitter/etc.

RTTY SO2R is a natural as you have so much time waiting as you xmit. I
don't know how people did RTTY contests before SO2R. I would have been
bored to death waiting anxiously for my rig to unkey.

W0MU

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




_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. >From Bill: Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you find?

Bill, I found Joe using his current call W4TV in my contest logs and LoTW
and I am sure I have him in my logs with him using a previous call, only I
forget what his old call was.

Personally Bill, I find you asking as to which products Joe sells a darn
right hit below the belt. I have seen Joe on this reflector and countless
other reflectors never pushing his wares. In fact a good many times I have
seen Joe helping us Hams with products he has absolutely no monetary
interest in, AKA the competition.

Eric - VE3GSI



-----Original Message-----
Sent: June-14-10 8:18 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

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. >From Bill: Not so. The XE RTTY contest has separate classes for one and two
radio operation.

Well Bill, the XE sponsors may have a separate class, they also seem to have
a NO certificate department.

Eric...


-----Original Message-----
Sent: June-14-10 8:23 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:22:42 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>
>There is no contest that has a "multi-transmitter" class for
>single operators.

REPLY:

Not so. The XE RTTY contest has separate classes for one and two radio
operation.

Knowing Joe as I do, he will no doubt argue that two radios is somehow
different from two transmitters, but that's just hair-splitting
rubbish.

73, Bill W6WRT


_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

Bill,

On both counts, Thanks saying what needed to be said.


Mike WB9B
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,
Dont feel bad I too have done this on several occasions with N1MM so you are
not alone.

And just my two cents worth, I haven't done any RTTY contest lately because
I just got tired of putting up with all the violators, run freq grabbers,
and just generally unsportsman like behavior. I am by far and away a small
station, 100watts and wires, no amps -- just can't put it in the budget
right now. Not SO2R just plain ole the little guy. I did alright in the
contest I did participate in but just wanted to enjoy my contest not get run
over by someone running a bigger system than I am. And I agree 100 if
people are cheating then by god they should be reported.

And please for the love of god, give us little guys a chance and quit
running us off. I won't give the call but on three different occasions I
worked a RTTY tester who answered my run, thanked me then immediately took
off calling CQ on my freq. Same guy each time, hell he has probably been
mentioned here already --- oh yeah and these weren't Sprints either. Hope to
make a comeback on the RTTY scene soon once I get a weekend where there is a
good test and not a CW test I am more interested in --- yep fell off the
Digi bandwagon and landed on the CW.. ;)


Jeremy
N4JIK formerly KD4LCR/7J6CEM
Fort Benning, GA/Phenix City, AL
Triple Play Award #327

"The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but
because he loves what is behind him." G. K. Chesterton




-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of W0MU Mike Fatchett
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 3:43 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

Please report him. I have heard this too. This is not a problem with SO2R
it is a problem with the operator. We don't remove cars from the road
because the speed or break the rules, they get tickets and their ability to
drive a car may be removed. Maybe this operator was at a station that could
have 6 bands going at once.

As already state folks use high power and claim less, use amps that put out
well over our legal limit etc. This has been going on for years and years.

As for getting spotting on his run frequency I have done it. If you use
N1MM and do not have the running box checked and have the spot new calls
going this will happen. If your spots window it might take a bit to notice.

W0MU



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 Don Hill AA5AU
Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 11:04 PM
Subject: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

As I tuned around the bands during the last 8 hour segment, I found a USA
SO2R station transmitting on both 15 and 20 meters at the same time in a
blatant violation of the rules. It wasn't a case of someone just making a
mistake. I watched for 15-20 minutes and simply couldn't believe what I was
seeing. I did let them know he or they were breaking the rules and he/they
immediately stopped.
But it made me mad.

Then a little while longer, I saw my call pop up on the bandmap on 20 meters
even though I was S&P on that band. At first I thought someone made a
mistake. Then I looked at the origin of the spot and realized it was a
station I had just worked. This operator spotted me on his run frequency.
Although that is not a direct violation of the rules, it still irked me.

I don't know how much of this goes on, but it needs to stop. The next time
I catch someone transmitting two signals at the same time, I will call them
out publicly on it. I realize there will be instances of stations
transmitting at the same time (Multi-2, Multi-Multi). But the rules of the
DLDC were specific:

4. GENERAL for all categories:

(e) Only one transmitted signal is permitted at any time.

As far as spotting other stations on one's run frequency, it's just the
wrong thing to do. There have been times, such as when I was on ten meters,
when I wanted to spot someone on my run frequency just to let everyone else
know the band was open. But I didn't. So don't get caught up in it.

There's been a lot of cheating going on in CW and SSB contests and it's
apparent there is cheating on RTTY too. I'm not sure what we can do about
it other than make it a point to let people know we aren't going to tolerate
it. I'm definitely not going to tolerate it.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>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

REPLY:

That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in
contests himself. :-) :-) :-)

Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have
more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does not appear
even once.

Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North
American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R contesting.
Period.

When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start
listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

> If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up and
> operate a full blown, legal limit SO2R, Thats fine.
> But don't expect to be in competition with someone of a more
> modest station.

How about, "If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up
multiple towers with multiple stacked arrays, that's fine. But don't
expect to be in competition with someone with a more modest station?

> The point of this whole thread and many more before it is simply,
> Make SO2R its own class.
> Do that, and we bring operator skill to an even fight.

That's BS - you don't even begin to bring operator skill to an "even
fight" unless you control for *ALL* - *100%* of the differences between
stations including antennas, receiver sensitivity, and geographical
differences. SO2R is only *ONE* component in the mix.

As Contesting Hall of Fame inductee AA5AU has stated publicly, he
started using SO2R to make up for the disadvantages he had in
antennas. There was no way he could compete with the stacks of
monoband antennas that dominated RTTY radiosport. I suspect the
same is true in other modes as well ... a well designed, modest
station with a couple of tribanders will allow a *SKILLED* operator
to compete on a more level playing field with a less skilled operator
who has bigger antennas and engages in "checkbook contesting."

Making SO2R its own class only serves to push operators who choose
one tool into a separate class. You, and others like you who would
destroy 60 years of contesting tradition, will still loose to the
deep pocket operators who can build multiple tower antenna farms.

However, I'll make you this offer ... if you are willing to convince
contest sponsors to create a class that excludes *BOTH* SO2R and any
antenna with more than 2.3 dBi gain in free space or more than 10
meters above ground, I'll happily support you in your effort to
"bring operator skill to an even fight." Otherwise, your argument
is nothing more than an attempt to use "operator skill" as a
codeword for "I don't like SO2R."

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 8:33 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
> Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>> > 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.
>>
>>
>
>> So If your Not saying it is Not an advantage, then you are agreeing
>> that a SO2R operator does have a edge.
> Then Fine, Let him keep the edge, but let him take it up against the
> skills of other SO2R stations.
> And let the SO1R take their skills, fairly, against other SO1R stations.
>
> If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up and operate
> a full blown, legal limit SO2R, Thats fine.
> But don't expect to be in competition with someone of a more modest
> station.
> The point of this whole thread and many more before it is simply,
> Make SO2R its own class.
> Do that, and we bring operator skill to an even fight.
>
> Mike WB9B
>
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. I see this has deteriorated into hostile territory. I should have known better. Next time I'll keep my thoughts to myself, report
the offender to the contest manager and post the offender on the Internet.

I think we can squelch this discussion now since it's gone beyond being productive.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>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

REPLY:

That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)

Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
not appear even once.

Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
contesting.
Period.

When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Thanks for the fun Don, Kinda like starting a riot then going home to
watch it on TV eh.
I'll stand with Bill, W6WRT on this one, And leave the lobbyists to
there own.

Cu in the next one, SO1R....
Mike WB9B



Don Hill AA5AU wrote:
> I see this has deteriorated into hostile territory. I should have known better. Next time I'll keep my thoughts to myself, report
> the offender to the contest manager and post the offender on the Internet.
>
> I think we can squelch this discussion now since it's gone beyond being productive.
>
> 73, Don AA5AU
> http://www.aa5au.com
> http://www.rttycontesting.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>
>> 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
>>
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
> not appear even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
> contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Of course Bill is a notoriously anti-technology and anti-SO2R
with nothing useful to add to the discussion. He's practiced
"if you don't like the message, attack the messenger" for a
long time.

Anyone who has changed calls recently and has no real antennas
in not likely to be in Bill's logs. I certainly don't find
W6WRT in the 25 - 35 year old logs from my very successful M/2
station back on Ohio.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>> 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
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
> not appear even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
> contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Bill and all,
With due respect what you are saying and NOT justifying W4TV, I checked my
Log and found W4TV 8 times confirmed QSL's in LoTW working him CW, SSB and
RTTY in 2006 and 2010 from US and Honduras.


> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
> >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
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in
> contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have
> more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does not appear
> even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North
> American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start
> listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. > Knowing Joe as I do, he will no doubt argue that two radios is
> somehow different from two transmitters, but that's just
> hair-splitting rubbish.

Yes, there is a big difference between legal SO2R (one signal at
a time) and multi-transmitter (multiple signals at a time which
is what STARTED this thread). Of course, Bill knows the difference.

He simply lacks the intellectual honesty to admit the difference
and prefers to ignore any inconvenient fact as "rubbish."

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 8:22 PM, Bill, W6WRT wrote:
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:22:42 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>>
>> There is no contest that has a "multi-transmitter" class for single
>> operators.
>
> REPLY:
>
> Not so. The XE RTTY contest has separate classes for one and two
> radio operation.
>
> Knowing Joe as I do, he will no doubt argue that two radios is
> somehow different from two transmitters, but that's just
> hair-splitting rubbish.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. > Nowhere else? Did you forget about separation by power class or number
> of operators?

Number of operators is multi-operator - not single operator. SO2R is
not an applicable issue in multi-operator classes. Beside that when
did operators become "hardware?"

As to power, that's not specifically hardware ... and is one of the few
reasonable and truly measurable differentiation.

By the way Bill, you never did agree to promote a real separation of
operator skill and hardware - you were not willing to give up your
antennas. Until you're willing to do so, you can do all the name
calling you like but it doesn't change the fact that you are simply
an anti-SO2R bigot.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 8:17 PM, Bill, W6WRT wrote:
> 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. I guess we need a category for single radio multiple decoders too? Isn't
this a big advantage? Where exactly do you draw the line and how?

It takes great skill to be able to do SO2R competitively. Hardware is just
one piece that makes it easier. It is the grey stuff between the ears that
allows an operator to excel, especially on CW and SSB. A lousy op is not
going to win the next big contest by adding a 2nd rig/xmitter/etc.

RTTY SO2R is a natural as you have so much time waiting as you xmit. I
don't know how people did RTTY contests before SO2R. I would have been
bored to death waiting anxiously for my rig to unkey.

W0MU

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




_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. >From Bill: Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you find?

Bill, I found Joe using his current call W4TV in my contest logs and LoTW
and I am sure I have him in my logs with him using a previous call, only I
forget what his old call was.

Personally Bill, I find you asking as to which products Joe sells a darn
right hit below the belt. I have seen Joe on this reflector and countless
other reflectors never pushing his wares. In fact a good many times I have
seen Joe helping us Hams with products he has absolutely no monetary
interest in, AKA the competition.

Eric - VE3GSI



-----Original Message-----
Sent: June-14-10 8:18 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

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. >From Bill: Not so. The XE RTTY contest has separate classes for one and two
radio operation.

Well Bill, the XE sponsors may have a separate class, they also seem to have
a NO certificate department.

Eric...


-----Original Message-----
Sent: June-14-10 8:23 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:22:42 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>
>There is no contest that has a "multi-transmitter" class for
>single operators.

REPLY:

Not so. The XE RTTY contest has separate classes for one and two radio
operation.

Knowing Joe as I do, he will no doubt argue that two radios is somehow
different from two transmitters, but that's just hair-splitting
rubbish.

73, Bill W6WRT


_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
> Huh, of course there is a lot of justification or else we wouldn't
> have Single Operator Low power - High Power, Assisted and
> non-assisted.

High Power/Low Power is an artifact of the 1950's in an attempt to
"level the playing field" but it was never extended to other areas
of hardware (like antennas in the 60's and computers in the 70's).

Assisted and non-assisted are not hardware related - they deal with
OUTSIDE OPERATOR ASSISTANCE (e.g. spotting from OUTSIDE one's own
shack) and are probably the most pervasively used form of cheating
there is.).

None of this addresses the use of multiple radios to change bands
rapidly by a skilled operator (e.g. SO2R).

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 10:41 PM, WS7I wrote:
> ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From:
___________________________________________________

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

Bill,

On both counts, Thanks saying what needed to be said.


Mike WB9B
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,
Dont feel bad I too have done this on several occasions with N1MM so you are
not alone.

And just my two cents worth, I haven't done any RTTY contest lately because
I just got tired of putting up with all the violators, run freq grabbers,
and just generally unsportsman like behavior. I am by far and away a small
station, 100watts and wires, no amps -- just can't put it in the budget
right now. Not SO2R just plain ole the little guy. I did alright in the
contest I did participate in but just wanted to enjoy my contest not get run
over by someone running a bigger system than I am. And I agree 100 if
people are cheating then by god they should be reported.

And please for the love of god, give us little guys a chance and quit
running us off. I won't give the call but on three different occasions I
worked a RTTY tester who answered my run, thanked me then immediately took
off calling CQ on my freq. Same guy each time, hell he has probably been
mentioned here already --- oh yeah and these weren't Sprints either. Hope to
make a comeback on the RTTY scene soon once I get a weekend where there is a
good test and not a CW test I am more interested in --- yep fell off the
Digi bandwagon and landed on the CW.. ;)


Jeremy
N4JIK formerly KD4LCR/7J6CEM
Fort Benning, GA/Phenix City, AL
Triple Play Award #327

"The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but
because he loves what is behind him." G. K. Chesterton




-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of W0MU Mike Fatchett
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 3:43 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

Please report him. I have heard this too. This is not a problem with SO2R
it is a problem with the operator. We don't remove cars from the road
because the speed or break the rules, they get tickets and their ability to
drive a car may be removed. Maybe this operator was at a station that could
have 6 bands going at once.

As already state folks use high power and claim less, use amps that put out
well over our legal limit etc. This has been going on for years and years.

As for getting spotting on his run frequency I have done it. If you use
N1MM and do not have the running box checked and have the spot new calls
going this will happen. If your spots window it might take a bit to notice.

W0MU



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 Don Hill AA5AU
Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 11:04 PM
Subject: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

As I tuned around the bands during the last 8 hour segment, I found a USA
SO2R station transmitting on both 15 and 20 meters at the same time in a
blatant violation of the rules. It wasn't a case of someone just making a
mistake. I watched for 15-20 minutes and simply couldn't believe what I was
seeing. I did let them know he or they were breaking the rules and he/they
immediately stopped.
But it made me mad.

Then a little while longer, I saw my call pop up on the bandmap on 20 meters
even though I was S&P on that band. At first I thought someone made a
mistake. Then I looked at the origin of the spot and realized it was a
station I had just worked. This operator spotted me on his run frequency.
Although that is not a direct violation of the rules, it still irked me.

I don't know how much of this goes on, but it needs to stop. The next time
I catch someone transmitting two signals at the same time, I will call them
out publicly on it. I realize there will be instances of stations
transmitting at the same time (Multi-2, Multi-Multi). But the rules of the
DLDC were specific:

4. GENERAL for all categories:

(e) Only one transmitted signal is permitted at any time.

As far as spotting other stations on one's run frequency, it's just the
wrong thing to do. There have been times, such as when I was on ten meters,
when I wanted to spot someone on my run frequency just to let everyone else
know the band was open. But I didn't. So don't get caught up in it.

There's been a lot of cheating going on in CW and SSB contests and it's
apparent there is cheating on RTTY too. I'm not sure what we can do about
it other than make it a point to let people know we aren't going to tolerate
it. I'm definitely not going to tolerate it.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>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

REPLY:

That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in
contests himself. :-) :-) :-)

Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have
more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does not appear
even once.

Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North
American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R contesting.
Period.

When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start
listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

> If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up and
> operate a full blown, legal limit SO2R, Thats fine.
> But don't expect to be in competition with someone of a more
> modest station.

How about, "If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up
multiple towers with multiple stacked arrays, that's fine. But don't
expect to be in competition with someone with a more modest station?

> The point of this whole thread and many more before it is simply,
> Make SO2R its own class.
> Do that, and we bring operator skill to an even fight.

That's BS - you don't even begin to bring operator skill to an "even
fight" unless you control for *ALL* - *100%* of the differences between
stations including antennas, receiver sensitivity, and geographical
differences. SO2R is only *ONE* component in the mix.

As Contesting Hall of Fame inductee AA5AU has stated publicly, he
started using SO2R to make up for the disadvantages he had in
antennas. There was no way he could compete with the stacks of
monoband antennas that dominated RTTY radiosport. I suspect the
same is true in other modes as well ... a well designed, modest
station with a couple of tribanders will allow a *SKILLED* operator
to compete on a more level playing field with a less skilled operator
who has bigger antennas and engages in "checkbook contesting."

Making SO2R its own class only serves to push operators who choose
one tool into a separate class. You, and others like you who would
destroy 60 years of contesting tradition, will still loose to the
deep pocket operators who can build multiple tower antenna farms.

However, I'll make you this offer ... if you are willing to convince
contest sponsors to create a class that excludes *BOTH* SO2R and any
antenna with more than 2.3 dBi gain in free space or more than 10
meters above ground, I'll happily support you in your effort to
"bring operator skill to an even fight." Otherwise, your argument
is nothing more than an attempt to use "operator skill" as a
codeword for "I don't like SO2R."

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 8:33 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
> Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>> > 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.
>>
>>
>
>> So If your Not saying it is Not an advantage, then you are agreeing
>> that a SO2R operator does have a edge.
> Then Fine, Let him keep the edge, but let him take it up against the
> skills of other SO2R stations.
> And let the SO1R take their skills, fairly, against other SO1R stations.
>
> If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up and operate
> a full blown, legal limit SO2R, Thats fine.
> But don't expect to be in competition with someone of a more modest
> station.
> The point of this whole thread and many more before it is simply,
> Make SO2R its own class.
> Do that, and we bring operator skill to an even fight.
>
> Mike WB9B
>
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. I see this has deteriorated into hostile territory. I should have known better. Next time I'll keep my thoughts to myself, report
the offender to the contest manager and post the offender on the Internet.

I think we can squelch this discussion now since it's gone beyond being productive.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>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

REPLY:

That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)

Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
not appear even once.

Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
contesting.
Period.

When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Thanks for the fun Don, Kinda like starting a riot then going home to
watch it on TV eh.
I'll stand with Bill, W6WRT on this one, And leave the lobbyists to
there own.

Cu in the next one, SO1R....
Mike WB9B



Don Hill AA5AU wrote:
> I see this has deteriorated into hostile territory. I should have known better. Next time I'll keep my thoughts to myself, report
> the offender to the contest manager and post the offender on the Internet.
>
> I think we can squelch this discussion now since it's gone beyond being productive.
>
> 73, Don AA5AU
> http://www.aa5au.com
> http://www.rttycontesting.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>
>> 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
>>
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
> not appear even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
> contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Of course Bill is a notoriously anti-technology and anti-SO2R
with nothing useful to add to the discussion. He's practiced
"if you don't like the message, attack the messenger" for a
long time.

Anyone who has changed calls recently and has no real antennas
in not likely to be in Bill's logs. I certainly don't find
W6WRT in the 25 - 35 year old logs from my very successful M/2
station back on Ohio.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>> 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
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
> not appear even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
> contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Bill and all,
With due respect what you are saying and NOT justifying W4TV, I checked my
Log and found W4TV 8 times confirmed QSL's in LoTW working him CW, SSB and
RTTY in 2006 and 2010 from US and Honduras.


> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
> >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
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in
> contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have
> more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does not appear
> even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North
> American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start
> listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. > Knowing Joe as I do, he will no doubt argue that two radios is
> somehow different from two transmitters, but that's just
> hair-splitting rubbish.

Yes, there is a big difference between legal SO2R (one signal at
a time) and multi-transmitter (multiple signals at a time which
is what STARTED this thread). Of course, Bill knows the difference.

He simply lacks the intellectual honesty to admit the difference
and prefers to ignore any inconvenient fact as "rubbish."

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 8:22 PM, Bill, W6WRT wrote:
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:22:42 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>>
>> There is no contest that has a "multi-transmitter" class for single
>> operators.
>
> REPLY:
>
> Not so. The XE RTTY contest has separate classes for one and two
> radio operation.
>
> Knowing Joe as I do, he will no doubt argue that two radios is
> somehow different from two transmitters, but that's just
> hair-splitting rubbish.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. > Nowhere else? Did you forget about separation by power class or number
> of operators?

Number of operators is multi-operator - not single operator. SO2R is
not an applicable issue in multi-operator classes. Beside that when
did operators become "hardware?"

As to power, that's not specifically hardware ... and is one of the few
reasonable and truly measurable differentiation.

By the way Bill, you never did agree to promote a real separation of
operator skill and hardware - you were not willing to give up your
antennas. Until you're willing to do so, you can do all the name
calling you like but it doesn't change the fact that you are simply
an anti-SO2R bigot.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 8:17 PM, Bill, W6WRT wrote:
> 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. I guess we need a category for single radio multiple decoders too? Isn't
this a big advantage? Where exactly do you draw the line and how?

It takes great skill to be able to do SO2R competitively. Hardware is just
one piece that makes it easier. It is the grey stuff between the ears that
allows an operator to excel, especially on CW and SSB. A lousy op is not
going to win the next big contest by adding a 2nd rig/xmitter/etc.

RTTY SO2R is a natural as you have so much time waiting as you xmit. I
don't know how people did RTTY contests before SO2R. I would have been
bored to death waiting anxiously for my rig to unkey.

W0MU

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




_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. >From Bill: Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you find?

Bill, I found Joe using his current call W4TV in my contest logs and LoTW
and I am sure I have him in my logs with him using a previous call, only I
forget what his old call was.

Personally Bill, I find you asking as to which products Joe sells a darn
right hit below the belt. I have seen Joe on this reflector and countless
other reflectors never pushing his wares. In fact a good many times I have
seen Joe helping us Hams with products he has absolutely no monetary
interest in, AKA the competition.

Eric - VE3GSI



-----Original Message-----
Sent: June-14-10 8:18 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

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. >From Bill: Not so. The XE RTTY contest has separate classes for one and two
radio operation.

Well Bill, the XE sponsors may have a separate class, they also seem to have
a NO certificate department.

Eric...


-----Original Message-----
Sent: June-14-10 8:23 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:22:42 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>
>There is no contest that has a "multi-transmitter" class for
>single operators.

REPLY:

Not so. The XE RTTY contest has separate classes for one and two radio
operation.

Knowing Joe as I do, he will no doubt argue that two radios is somehow
different from two transmitters, but that's just hair-splitting
rubbish.

73, Bill W6WRT


_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
> Huh, of course there is a lot of justification or else we wouldn't
> have Single Operator Low power - High Power, Assisted and
> non-assisted.

High Power/Low Power is an artifact of the 1950's in an attempt to
"level the playing field" but it was never extended to other areas
of hardware (like antennas in the 60's and computers in the 70's).

Assisted and non-assisted are not hardware related - they deal with
OUTSIDE OPERATOR ASSISTANCE (e.g. spotting from OUTSIDE one's own
shack) and are probably the most pervasively used form of cheating
there is.).

None of this addresses the use of multiple radios to change bands
rapidly by a skilled operator (e.g. SO2R).

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 10:41 PM, WS7I wrote:
> ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From:
___________________________________________________

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

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 23:37:09 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>
>None of this addresses the use of multiple radios to change bands
>rapidly by a skilled operator (e.g. SO2R).

REPLY:

AS usual Joe clouds the issue. SO2R is not about changing bands
rapidly. Anyone can flip a switch rapidly. It is about being able to
listen on another frequency WHILE TRANSMITTING, something a single
radio op can not do. It effectively doubles your operating time, a
HUGE advantage, much like having an amplifier or spotting assistance
or multiple operators. They have their own class and SO2R should too.
Joe has had this explained to him a zillion times but there is some
kind of mental block operating there. It's like arguing with a rock.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

Bill,

On both counts, Thanks saying what needed to be said.


Mike WB9B
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,
Dont feel bad I too have done this on several occasions with N1MM so you are
not alone.

And just my two cents worth, I haven't done any RTTY contest lately because
I just got tired of putting up with all the violators, run freq grabbers,
and just generally unsportsman like behavior. I am by far and away a small
station, 100watts and wires, no amps -- just can't put it in the budget
right now. Not SO2R just plain ole the little guy. I did alright in the
contest I did participate in but just wanted to enjoy my contest not get run
over by someone running a bigger system than I am. And I agree 100 if
people are cheating then by god they should be reported.

And please for the love of god, give us little guys a chance and quit
running us off. I won't give the call but on three different occasions I
worked a RTTY tester who answered my run, thanked me then immediately took
off calling CQ on my freq. Same guy each time, hell he has probably been
mentioned here already --- oh yeah and these weren't Sprints either. Hope to
make a comeback on the RTTY scene soon once I get a weekend where there is a
good test and not a CW test I am more interested in --- yep fell off the
Digi bandwagon and landed on the CW.. ;)


Jeremy
N4JIK formerly KD4LCR/7J6CEM
Fort Benning, GA/Phenix City, AL
Triple Play Award #327

"The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but
because he loves what is behind him." G. K. Chesterton




-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of W0MU Mike Fatchett
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 3:43 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

Please report him. I have heard this too. This is not a problem with SO2R
it is a problem with the operator. We don't remove cars from the road
because the speed or break the rules, they get tickets and their ability to
drive a car may be removed. Maybe this operator was at a station that could
have 6 bands going at once.

As already state folks use high power and claim less, use amps that put out
well over our legal limit etc. This has been going on for years and years.

As for getting spotting on his run frequency I have done it. If you use
N1MM and do not have the running box checked and have the spot new calls
going this will happen. If your spots window it might take a bit to notice.

W0MU



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 Don Hill AA5AU
Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 11:04 PM
Subject: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

As I tuned around the bands during the last 8 hour segment, I found a USA
SO2R station transmitting on both 15 and 20 meters at the same time in a
blatant violation of the rules. It wasn't a case of someone just making a
mistake. I watched for 15-20 minutes and simply couldn't believe what I was
seeing. I did let them know he or they were breaking the rules and he/they
immediately stopped.
But it made me mad.

Then a little while longer, I saw my call pop up on the bandmap on 20 meters
even though I was S&P on that band. At first I thought someone made a
mistake. Then I looked at the origin of the spot and realized it was a
station I had just worked. This operator spotted me on his run frequency.
Although that is not a direct violation of the rules, it still irked me.

I don't know how much of this goes on, but it needs to stop. The next time
I catch someone transmitting two signals at the same time, I will call them
out publicly on it. I realize there will be instances of stations
transmitting at the same time (Multi-2, Multi-Multi). But the rules of the
DLDC were specific:

4. GENERAL for all categories:

(e) Only one transmitted signal is permitted at any time.

As far as spotting other stations on one's run frequency, it's just the
wrong thing to do. There have been times, such as when I was on ten meters,
when I wanted to spot someone on my run frequency just to let everyone else
know the band was open. But I didn't. So don't get caught up in it.

There's been a lot of cheating going on in CW and SSB contests and it's
apparent there is cheating on RTTY too. I'm not sure what we can do about
it other than make it a point to let people know we aren't going to tolerate
it. I'm definitely not going to tolerate it.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>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

REPLY:

That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in
contests himself. :-) :-) :-)

Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have
more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does not appear
even once.

Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North
American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R contesting.
Period.

When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start
listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

> If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up and
> operate a full blown, legal limit SO2R, Thats fine.
> But don't expect to be in competition with someone of a more
> modest station.

How about, "If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up
multiple towers with multiple stacked arrays, that's fine. But don't
expect to be in competition with someone with a more modest station?

> The point of this whole thread and many more before it is simply,
> Make SO2R its own class.
> Do that, and we bring operator skill to an even fight.

That's BS - you don't even begin to bring operator skill to an "even
fight" unless you control for *ALL* - *100%* of the differences between
stations including antennas, receiver sensitivity, and geographical
differences. SO2R is only *ONE* component in the mix.

As Contesting Hall of Fame inductee AA5AU has stated publicly, he
started using SO2R to make up for the disadvantages he had in
antennas. There was no way he could compete with the stacks of
monoband antennas that dominated RTTY radiosport. I suspect the
same is true in other modes as well ... a well designed, modest
station with a couple of tribanders will allow a *SKILLED* operator
to compete on a more level playing field with a less skilled operator
who has bigger antennas and engages in "checkbook contesting."

Making SO2R its own class only serves to push operators who choose
one tool into a separate class. You, and others like you who would
destroy 60 years of contesting tradition, will still loose to the
deep pocket operators who can build multiple tower antenna farms.

However, I'll make you this offer ... if you are willing to convince
contest sponsors to create a class that excludes *BOTH* SO2R and any
antenna with more than 2.3 dBi gain in free space or more than 10
meters above ground, I'll happily support you in your effort to
"bring operator skill to an even fight." Otherwise, your argument
is nothing more than an attempt to use "operator skill" as a
codeword for "I don't like SO2R."

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 8:33 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
> Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>> > 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.
>>
>>
>
>> So If your Not saying it is Not an advantage, then you are agreeing
>> that a SO2R operator does have a edge.
> Then Fine, Let him keep the edge, but let him take it up against the
> skills of other SO2R stations.
> And let the SO1R take their skills, fairly, against other SO1R stations.
>
> If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up and operate
> a full blown, legal limit SO2R, Thats fine.
> But don't expect to be in competition with someone of a more modest
> station.
> The point of this whole thread and many more before it is simply,
> Make SO2R its own class.
> Do that, and we bring operator skill to an even fight.
>
> Mike WB9B
>
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. I see this has deteriorated into hostile territory. I should have known better. Next time I'll keep my thoughts to myself, report
the offender to the contest manager and post the offender on the Internet.

I think we can squelch this discussion now since it's gone beyond being productive.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>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

REPLY:

That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)

Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
not appear even once.

Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
contesting.
Period.

When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Thanks for the fun Don, Kinda like starting a riot then going home to
watch it on TV eh.
I'll stand with Bill, W6WRT on this one, And leave the lobbyists to
there own.

Cu in the next one, SO1R....
Mike WB9B



Don Hill AA5AU wrote:
> I see this has deteriorated into hostile territory. I should have known better. Next time I'll keep my thoughts to myself, report
> the offender to the contest manager and post the offender on the Internet.
>
> I think we can squelch this discussion now since it's gone beyond being productive.
>
> 73, Don AA5AU
> http://www.aa5au.com
> http://www.rttycontesting.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>
>> 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
>>
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
> not appear even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
> contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Of course Bill is a notoriously anti-technology and anti-SO2R
with nothing useful to add to the discussion. He's practiced
"if you don't like the message, attack the messenger" for a
long time.

Anyone who has changed calls recently and has no real antennas
in not likely to be in Bill's logs. I certainly don't find
W6WRT in the 25 - 35 year old logs from my very successful M/2
station back on Ohio.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>> 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
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
> not appear even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
> contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Bill and all,
With due respect what you are saying and NOT justifying W4TV, I checked my
Log and found W4TV 8 times confirmed QSL's in LoTW working him CW, SSB and
RTTY in 2006 and 2010 from US and Honduras.


> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
> >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
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in
> contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have
> more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does not appear
> even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North
> American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start
> listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. > Knowing Joe as I do, he will no doubt argue that two radios is
> somehow different from two transmitters, but that's just
> hair-splitting rubbish.

Yes, there is a big difference between legal SO2R (one signal at
a time) and multi-transmitter (multiple signals at a time which
is what STARTED this thread). Of course, Bill knows the difference.

He simply lacks the intellectual honesty to admit the difference
and prefers to ignore any inconvenient fact as "rubbish."

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 8:22 PM, Bill, W6WRT wrote:
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:22:42 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>>
>> There is no contest that has a "multi-transmitter" class for single
>> operators.
>
> REPLY:
>
> Not so. The XE RTTY contest has separate classes for one and two
> radio operation.
>
> Knowing Joe as I do, he will no doubt argue that two radios is
> somehow different from two transmitters, but that's just
> hair-splitting rubbish.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. > Nowhere else? Did you forget about separation by power class or number
> of operators?

Number of operators is multi-operator - not single operator. SO2R is
not an applicable issue in multi-operator classes. Beside that when
did operators become "hardware?"

As to power, that's not specifically hardware ... and is one of the few
reasonable and truly measurable differentiation.

By the way Bill, you never did agree to promote a real separation of
operator skill and hardware - you were not willing to give up your
antennas. Until you're willing to do so, you can do all the name
calling you like but it doesn't change the fact that you are simply
an anti-SO2R bigot.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 8:17 PM, Bill, W6WRT wrote:
> 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. I guess we need a category for single radio multiple decoders too? Isn't
this a big advantage? Where exactly do you draw the line and how?

It takes great skill to be able to do SO2R competitively. Hardware is just
one piece that makes it easier. It is the grey stuff between the ears that
allows an operator to excel, especially on CW and SSB. A lousy op is not
going to win the next big contest by adding a 2nd rig/xmitter/etc.

RTTY SO2R is a natural as you have so much time waiting as you xmit. I
don't know how people did RTTY contests before SO2R. I would have been
bored to death waiting anxiously for my rig to unkey.

W0MU

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




_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. >From Bill: Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you find?

Bill, I found Joe using his current call W4TV in my contest logs and LoTW
and I am sure I have him in my logs with him using a previous call, only I
forget what his old call was.

Personally Bill, I find you asking as to which products Joe sells a darn
right hit below the belt. I have seen Joe on this reflector and countless
other reflectors never pushing his wares. In fact a good many times I have
seen Joe helping us Hams with products he has absolutely no monetary
interest in, AKA the competition.

Eric - VE3GSI



-----Original Message-----
Sent: June-14-10 8:18 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

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. >From Bill: Not so. The XE RTTY contest has separate classes for one and two
radio operation.

Well Bill, the XE sponsors may have a separate class, they also seem to have
a NO certificate department.

Eric...


-----Original Message-----
Sent: June-14-10 8:23 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:22:42 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>
>There is no contest that has a "multi-transmitter" class for
>single operators.

REPLY:

Not so. The XE RTTY contest has separate classes for one and two radio
operation.

Knowing Joe as I do, he will no doubt argue that two radios is somehow
different from two transmitters, but that's just hair-splitting
rubbish.

73, Bill W6WRT


_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
> Huh, of course there is a lot of justification or else we wouldn't
> have Single Operator Low power - High Power, Assisted and
> non-assisted.

High Power/Low Power is an artifact of the 1950's in an attempt to
"level the playing field" but it was never extended to other areas
of hardware (like antennas in the 60's and computers in the 70's).

Assisted and non-assisted are not hardware related - they deal with
OUTSIDE OPERATOR ASSISTANCE (e.g. spotting from OUTSIDE one's own
shack) and are probably the most pervasively used form of cheating
there is.).

None of this addresses the use of multiple radios to change bands
rapidly by a skilled operator (e.g. SO2R).

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 10:41 PM, WS7I wrote:
> ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From:
___________________________________________________

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

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 23:37:09 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>
>None of this addresses the use of multiple radios to change bands
>rapidly by a skilled operator (e.g. SO2R).

REPLY:

AS usual Joe clouds the issue. SO2R is not about changing bands
rapidly. Anyone can flip a switch rapidly. It is about being able to
listen on another frequency WHILE TRANSMITTING, something a single
radio op can not do. It effectively doubles your operating time, a
HUGE advantage, much like having an amplifier or spotting assistance
or multiple operators. They have their own class and SO2R should too.
Joe has had this explained to him a zillion times but there is some
kind of mental block operating there. It's like arguing with a rock.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. W4TV said:
> As Contesting Hall of Fame inductee AA5AU has stated publicly, he
> started using SO2R to make up for the disadvantages he had in
> antennas. There was no way he could compete with the stacks of
> monoband antennas that dominated RTTY radiosport.

Don't know about that. Seems like just the other day I saw where Don won
the RTTY Roundup with a ground mounted vertical some time back. Seems like
skill must play some part in putting up a winning score. 73
Tom W7WHY

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

Bill,

On both counts, Thanks saying what needed to be said.


Mike WB9B
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Mike,
Dont feel bad I too have done this on several occasions with N1MM so you are
not alone.

And just my two cents worth, I haven't done any RTTY contest lately because
I just got tired of putting up with all the violators, run freq grabbers,
and just generally unsportsman like behavior. I am by far and away a small
station, 100watts and wires, no amps -- just can't put it in the budget
right now. Not SO2R just plain ole the little guy. I did alright in the
contest I did participate in but just wanted to enjoy my contest not get run
over by someone running a bigger system than I am. And I agree 100 if
people are cheating then by god they should be reported.

And please for the love of god, give us little guys a chance and quit
running us off. I won't give the call but on three different occasions I
worked a RTTY tester who answered my run, thanked me then immediately took
off calling CQ on my freq. Same guy each time, hell he has probably been
mentioned here already --- oh yeah and these weren't Sprints either. Hope to
make a comeback on the RTTY scene soon once I get a weekend where there is a
good test and not a CW test I am more interested in --- yep fell off the
Digi bandwagon and landed on the CW.. ;)


Jeremy
N4JIK formerly KD4LCR/7J6CEM
Fort Benning, GA/Phenix City, AL
Triple Play Award #327

"The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but
because he loves what is behind him." G. K. Chesterton




-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of W0MU Mike Fatchett
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 3:43 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

Please report him. I have heard this too. This is not a problem with SO2R
it is a problem with the operator. We don't remove cars from the road
because the speed or break the rules, they get tickets and their ability to
drive a car may be removed. Maybe this operator was at a station that could
have 6 bands going at once.

As already state folks use high power and claim less, use amps that put out
well over our legal limit etc. This has been going on for years and years.

As for getting spotting on his run frequency I have done it. If you use
N1MM and do not have the running box checked and have the spot new calls
going this will happen. If your spots window it might take a bit to notice.

W0MU



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 Don Hill AA5AU
Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 11:04 PM
Subject: [RTTY] Disturbing Observations

As I tuned around the bands during the last 8 hour segment, I found a USA
SO2R station transmitting on both 15 and 20 meters at the same time in a
blatant violation of the rules. It wasn't a case of someone just making a
mistake. I watched for 15-20 minutes and simply couldn't believe what I was
seeing. I did let them know he or they were breaking the rules and he/they
immediately stopped.
But it made me mad.

Then a little while longer, I saw my call pop up on the bandmap on 20 meters
even though I was S&P on that band. At first I thought someone made a
mistake. Then I looked at the origin of the spot and realized it was a
station I had just worked. This operator spotted me on his run frequency.
Although that is not a direct violation of the rules, it still irked me.

I don't know how much of this goes on, but it needs to stop. The next time
I catch someone transmitting two signals at the same time, I will call them
out publicly on it. I realize there will be instances of stations
transmitting at the same time (Multi-2, Multi-Multi). But the rules of the
DLDC were specific:

4. GENERAL for all categories:

(e) Only one transmitted signal is permitted at any time.

As far as spotting other stations on one's run frequency, it's just the
wrong thing to do. There have been times, such as when I was on ten meters,
when I wanted to spot someone on my run frequency just to let everyone else
know the band was open. But I didn't. So don't get caught up in it.

There's been a lot of cheating going on in CW and SSB contests and it's
apparent there is cheating on RTTY too. I'm not sure what we can do about
it other than make it a point to let people know we aren't going to tolerate
it. I'm definitely not going to tolerate it.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>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

REPLY:

That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in
contests himself. :-) :-) :-)

Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have
more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does not appear
even once.

Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North
American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R contesting.
Period.

When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start
listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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

> If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up and
> operate a full blown, legal limit SO2R, Thats fine.
> But don't expect to be in competition with someone of a more
> modest station.

How about, "If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up
multiple towers with multiple stacked arrays, that's fine. But don't
expect to be in competition with someone with a more modest station?

> The point of this whole thread and many more before it is simply,
> Make SO2R its own class.
> Do that, and we bring operator skill to an even fight.

That's BS - you don't even begin to bring operator skill to an "even
fight" unless you control for *ALL* - *100%* of the differences between
stations including antennas, receiver sensitivity, and geographical
differences. SO2R is only *ONE* component in the mix.

As Contesting Hall of Fame inductee AA5AU has stated publicly, he
started using SO2R to make up for the disadvantages he had in
antennas. There was no way he could compete with the stacks of
monoband antennas that dominated RTTY radiosport. I suspect the
same is true in other modes as well ... a well designed, modest
station with a couple of tribanders will allow a *SKILLED* operator
to compete on a more level playing field with a less skilled operator
who has bigger antennas and engages in "checkbook contesting."

Making SO2R its own class only serves to push operators who choose
one tool into a separate class. You, and others like you who would
destroy 60 years of contesting tradition, will still loose to the
deep pocket operators who can build multiple tower antenna farms.

However, I'll make you this offer ... if you are willing to convince
contest sponsors to create a class that excludes *BOTH* SO2R and any
antenna with more than 2.3 dBi gain in free space or more than 10
meters above ground, I'll happily support you in your effort to
"bring operator skill to an even fight." Otherwise, your argument
is nothing more than an attempt to use "operator skill" as a
codeword for "I don't like SO2R."

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 8:33 PM, Michael Haack wrote:
> Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>> > 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.
>>
>>
>
>> So If your Not saying it is Not an advantage, then you are agreeing
>> that a SO2R operator does have a edge.
> Then Fine, Let him keep the edge, but let him take it up against the
> skills of other SO2R stations.
> And let the SO1R take their skills, fairly, against other SO1R stations.
>
> If you've got the time, money and skill needed to set up and operate
> a full blown, legal limit SO2R, Thats fine.
> But don't expect to be in competition with someone of a more modest
> station.
> The point of this whole thread and many more before it is simply,
> Make SO2R its own class.
> Do that, and we bring operator skill to an even fight.
>
> Mike WB9B
>
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. I see this has deteriorated into hostile territory. I should have known better. Next time I'll keep my thoughts to myself, report
the offender to the contest manager and post the offender on the Internet.

I think we can squelch this discussion now since it's gone beyond being productive.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>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

REPLY:

That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)

Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
not appear even once.

Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
contesting.
Period.

When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Thanks for the fun Don, Kinda like starting a riot then going home to
watch it on TV eh.
I'll stand with Bill, W6WRT on this one, And leave the lobbyists to
there own.

Cu in the next one, SO1R....
Mike WB9B



Don Hill AA5AU wrote:
> I see this has deteriorated into hostile territory. I should have known better. Next time I'll keep my thoughts to myself, report
> the offender to the contest manager and post the offender on the Internet.
>
> I think we can squelch this discussion now since it's gone beyond being productive.
>
> 73, Don AA5AU
> http://www.aa5au.com
> http://www.rttycontesting.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>
>> 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
>>
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
> not appear even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
> contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Of course Bill is a notoriously anti-technology and anti-SO2R
with nothing useful to add to the discussion. He's practiced
"if you don't like the message, attack the messenger" for a
long time.

Anyone who has changed calls recently and has no real antennas
in not likely to be in Bill's logs. I certainly don't find
W6WRT in the 25 - 35 year old logs from my very successful M/2
station back on Ohio.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] cheating
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>> 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
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does
> not appear even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R
> contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Bill and all,
With due respect what you are saying and NOT justifying W4TV, I checked my
Log and found W4TV 8 times confirmed QSL's in LoTW working him CW, SSB and
RTTY in 2006 and 2010 from US and Honduras.


> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
> >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
>
> REPLY:
>
> That is TOOOOO funny, coming from one who never participates in
> contests himself. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you have? I have
> more than 50,000 RTTY contest QSOs in my log and W4TV does not appear
> even once.
>
> Joe's interest in contesting is purely commercial. He is the North
> American distributor for products designed to enhance SO2R contesting.
> Period.
>
> When I start seeing his call print during a contest, I might start
> listening to what he has to say. Otherwise, it's just QRN.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. > Knowing Joe as I do, he will no doubt argue that two radios is
> somehow different from two transmitters, but that's just
> hair-splitting rubbish.

Yes, there is a big difference between legal SO2R (one signal at
a time) and multi-transmitter (multiple signals at a time which
is what STARTED this thread). Of course, Bill knows the difference.

He simply lacks the intellectual honesty to admit the difference
and prefers to ignore any inconvenient fact as "rubbish."

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 6/14/2010 8:22 PM, Bill, W6WRT wrote:
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:22:42 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"
>
>>
>> There is no contest that has a "multi-transmitter" class for single
>> operators.
>
> REPLY:
>
> Not so. The XE RTTY contest has separate classes for one and two
> radio operation.
>
> Knowing Joe as I do, he will no doubt argue that two radios is
> somehow different from two transmitters, but that's just
> hair-splitting rubbish.
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. > Nowhere else? Did you forget about separation by power class or number
> of operators?

Number of operators is multi-operator - not single operator. SO2R is
not an applicable issue in multi-operator classes. Beside that when
did operators become "hardware?"

As to power, that's not specifically hardware ... and is one of the few
reasonable and truly measurable differentiation.

By the way Bill, you never did agree to promote a real separation of
operator skill and hardware - you were not willing to give up your
antennas. Until you're willing to do so, you can do all the name
calling you like but it doesn't change the fact that you are simply
an anti-SO2R bigot.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 8:17 PM, Bill, W6WRT wrote:
> 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. I guess we need a category for single radio multiple decoders too? Isn't
this a big advantage? Where exactly do you draw the line and how?

It takes great skill to be able to do SO2R competitively. Hardware is just
one piece that makes it easier. It is the grey stuff between the ears that
allows an operator to excel, especially on CW and SSB. A lousy op is not
going to win the next big contest by adding a 2nd rig/xmitter/etc.

RTTY SO2R is a natural as you have so much time waiting as you xmit. I
don't know how people did RTTY contests before SO2R. I would have been
bored to death waiting anxiously for my rig to unkey.

W0MU

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




_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. >From Bill: Check your logs folks - how many W4TV contest QSOs do you find?

Bill, I found Joe using his current call W4TV in my contest logs and LoTW
and I am sure I have him in my logs with him using a previous call, only I
forget what his old call was.

Personally Bill, I find you asking as to which products Joe sells a darn
right hit below the belt. I have seen Joe on this reflector and countless
other reflectors never pushing his wares. In fact a good many times I have
seen Joe helping us Hams with products he has absolutely no monetary
interest in, AKA the competition.

Eric - VE3GSI



-----Original Message-----
Sent: June-14-10 8:18 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

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. >From Bill: Not so. The XE RTTY contest has separate classes for one and two
radio operation.

Well Bill, the XE sponsors may have a separate class, they also seem to have
a NO certificate department.

Eric...


-----Original Message-----
Sent: June-14-10 8:23 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Cheating

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:22:42 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>
>There is no contest that has a "multi-transmitter" class for
>single operators.

REPLY:

Not so. The XE RTTY contest has separate classes for one and two radio
operation.

Knowing Joe as I do, he will no doubt argue that two radios is somehow
different from two transmitters, but that's just hair-splitting
rubbish.

73, Bill W6WRT


_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
> Huh, of course there is a lot of justification or else we wouldn't
> have Single Operator Low power - High Power, Assisted and
> non-assisted.

High Power/Low Power is an artifact of the 1950's in an attempt to
"level the playing field" but it was never extended to other areas
of hardware (like antennas in the 60's and computers in the 70's).

Assisted and non-assisted are not hardware related - they deal with
OUTSIDE OPERATOR ASSISTANCE (e.g. spotting from OUTSIDE one's own
shack) and are probably the most pervasively used form of cheating
there is.).

None of this addresses the use of multiple radios to change bands
rapidly by a skilled operator (e.g. SO2R).

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/14/2010 10:41 PM, WS7I wrote:
> ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From:
___________________________________________________

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

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 23:37:09 -0400, "Joe Subich, W4TV"

>
>None of this addresses the use of multiple radios to change bands
>rapidly by a skilled operator (e.g. SO2R).

REPLY:

AS usual Joe clouds the issue. SO2R is not about changing bands
rapidly. Anyone can flip a switch rapidly. It is about being able to
listen on another frequency WHILE TRANSMITTING, something a single
radio op can not do. It effectively doubles your operating time, a
HUGE advantage, much like having an amplifier or spotting assistance
or multiple operators. They have their own class and SO2R should too.
Joe has had this explained to him a zillion times but there is some
kind of mental block operating there. It's like arguing with a rock.

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. W4TV said:
> As Contesting Hall of Fame inductee AA5AU has stated publicly, he
> started using SO2R to make up for the disadvantages he had in
> antennas. There was no way he could compete with the stacks of
> monoband antennas that dominated RTTY radiosport.

Don't know about that. Seems like just the other day I saw where Don won
the RTTY Roundup with a ground mounted vertical some time back. Seems like
skill must play some part in putting up a winning score. 73
Tom W7WHY

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. On Jun 14, 2010, at 10:08 PM, Tom Osborne wrote:

> Don't know about that. Seems like just the other day I saw where Don won
> the RTTY Roundup with a ground mounted vertical some time back. Seems like
> skill must play some part in putting up a winning score.

The playing field will never be level until we completely ban SO1D -- Single Op One Don :-) :-).

73
Chen, W7AY

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

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