Just a thought that came into my mind this afternoon.

In most SOTM contests, the same authors (including myself) enter. However I have noticed that its usually the same authors that come near the top for the number of votes while others normally come bottom. Now don't get me wrong, I find it great to read such talent from the established authors, but I thought, why not have seperate SOTM contests according to parody writing ability? For example you could have an Expert SOTM contest for the established authors like Red Ant, Kristof Robertson and Agrimorfee, while for the less experienced authors like myself you could have a "Beginner" or "Intermediate" SOTM contest. Just thought it would make it fairer IMHO, rather like the handicap system they have in sports, so it would enable less experienced parody authors to gain higher votes.

Jason.

No there should not. First of all, how do you determine who is upper tier as opposed to lower tier? Also, wouldn't getting just a few points against the likes of Stu and Kristof be more rewarding than winning a contest against people who don't consider themselves good enough to compete against the whole site?

I don't think so, Jason.

Consider this: Yoidy won a SOTM medal on his first try ever in January, and it's almost definite that Chris Frederick, a relative rookie to AmIRight, is going to medal this month. Besides, it's a little patronizing to divide people up by skill, since great parodies can come from anyone. And the winners of the lower-level rounds would always have that nagging feeling that "it wasn't the BIG round"

Don't be disheartened. Everyone gets his or her due eventually. Just be patient and keep writing!

I don't really know, I've never been a SOTM holder.

While in one way, it wouldn't hurt, I'm just not sure.

Just a thought that came into my mind this afternoon.

In most SOTM contests, the same authors (including myself) enter. However I have noticed that its usually the same authors that come near the top for the number of votes while others normally come bottom. Now don't get me wrong, I find it great to read such talent from the established authors, but I thought, why not have seperate SOTM contests according to parody writing ability? For example you could have an Expert SOTM contest for the established authors like Red Ant, Kristof Robertson and Agrimorfee, while for the less experienced authors like myself you could have a "Beginner" or "Intermediate" SOTM contest. Just thought it would make it fairer IMHO, rather like the handicap system they have in sports, so it would enable less experienced parody authors to gain higher votes.

Jason.


Well, to be honest, I think that kinda does exist in that there are smaller contests that contain other criteria. . .what I do think might be cool is to have more small contests now and then that are for different reasons than just 'the best' parody to enter.  Like with Gross Out Deux. . .only 6 people entered, but it was a fun break.  I am stuck in 4th-6th every SOTM, generally my points don't move much.  If certain people enter I rank lower, if certain people don't I rank higher. . .and I see what you are saying.  And yeah, certain parodists do generally win every month, but there are exceptions. . .afterall 15 parodists did make the cut last year. . .if it makes you feel any better. . .I'm yet to get a top 3 in the SOTM contests. . .I've got victories elsewhere on AmIRight, but despite what I have felt were tiring efforts, I'm yet to break top 3, though I've been close.  Hang in there.

I pretty much agree with Ethan's reasons. Although I sometimes wonder if the "who" gets you more votes than the "what", I don't think winning the lower-tier round gives you as much bragging rights as winning the big one.

As far as Cat's comments, I have to confess that I finally got a silver medal in the ABC3 contest and 4th place in Ages of Amiright (which I also managed in the wild card round), so it isn't always the same people.

The one argument in favor of breaking up SOTM is the number of entries per month -- it makes voting and commenting quite a time-consuming process. But then again, you have an extra week or slightly more to do it, so that compensates somewhat.

All in all, I think we have enough contests as it is. i've held off on a few of my own ideas (like food parodies) because of this.

MM

I agree with Ethan too: well said.

Not to take anything away from the ABC rounds (as some of those have been fiercer than SOTM comps), but IMO that is the more "intermediate" competition. I'm flattered you mentioned me for the Expert SOTM round, but I haven't always been *that* good, heh heh. ABCs give us a chance to enter older works into competition, and, generally, older works are not quite up to par with an author's newer stuff.

Besides, SOTM is still mainly for feedback. While medals are great, it's not like they get you women, money, nice cars, etc.

I don't understand where someone would find value in being recognized if they know they're not being judged against the entire field.  Seems kind of patronizing, really.

A kids contest, I could understand, philosophically, but I don't know how you'd be able to verify ages.  Emiloca's in her 40's and she's been scamming you all with that whole precocious prodigy schtick for a while now.  Suckers.

I fail to see how various SOTM "levels" would be helpful. I see where you're coming from, but it seems to me that it encourages mediocrity. Instead of pushing authors to strive to continually improve their parodies, it's like saying "OK, I'm not very good so I'll enter the one for people who aren't very good and see who's the least mediocre", month after month after month. Where does one draw the line of just how mediocre they are? Can a person change their category and move up or down - or cheat the system and enter a lower level contest for an easy win?
This has been mentioned before, but some beginners score really well in SOTM within their first few tries. Those who don't score well get an idea of what they're up against and often get tips from other authors on how to improve.
It all comes down to the fact you tried. There's no way to win a contest if you don't enter, and some authors have been pleasantly surprised when a parody they weren't happy with does well. And remember - we all have to start somewhere. My work, for example, isn't on the same level as, say, Kristof's, but he's probably been writing much longer than I have. Experience goes a long way. I imagine his first parodies weren't SOTM-medal material either. (Hope you don't mind me using you as an example, Kristof, but as 2006 Parody Author of the Year I think you are a prime example of a "good" author.)
So my answer is no. As admirable an idea as it first appears, I think it wouldn't help and could actually risk undermining the integrity of the whole SOTM concept if cheating occurred.

Not to take anything away from the ABC rounds (as some of those have been fiercer than SOTM comps), but IMO that is the more "intermediate" competition.

ABCs give us a chance to enter older works into competition, and, generally, older works are not quite up to par with an author's newer stuff.



I agree with the point that SOTM is the premier comp, because it's current and shows off the latest work, so it's keenly contested.  Also, because the the ABCs often have fewer entries, they are less prestigious to win than SOTM.

But I disagree that the ABC's have lesser quality parodies.  IMO they usually have better quality parodies, because there are usually more to choose from, and tend to be from established authors.  In the ABC3(I) round for instance I had 20 to choose from, and I'm nowhere near as prolific as other authors here (and the entry I chose got nowhere against the tough competition)

In some SOTMs (including the next one) on the other hand, I will only have 1 parody to choose from.

With some letters Johnny D must have about a hundred to choose from, so obviously his submission is bound to be a good one (given that he's rejected 99 others to use it).

If you go through the ABC3 Honour Roll thread, the quality of the ABC3 winners easily compares to the quality of the SOTM winners. 
In the ABC3(S) and ABC3(T) comps there were twenty or so entrants (like a SOTM) AND the entries chosen didn't have the restriction of being written in one specific month, so both the S and T winners were classics. 

Also, as in SOTM, ABC3 entries are sometimes written especially for a letter coming up (I did that with my Q entry, and am doing one for the Z round) so that competitive aspect of the writing also boosts the quality of the parody.

I agree with the point that SOTM is the premier comp, because it's current and shows off the latest work, so it's keenly contested.  Also, because the the ABCs often have fewer entries, they are less prestigious to win than SOTM.

But I disagree that the ABC's have lesser quality parodies.  IMO they usually have better quality parodies, because there are usually more to choose from, and tend to be from established authors.  In the ABC3(I) round for instance I had 20 to choose from, and I'm nowhere near as prolific as other authors here (and the entry I chose got nowhere against the tough competition)

In some SOTMs (including the next one) on the other hand, I will only have 1 parody to choose from.

With some letters Johnny D must have about a hundred to choose from, so obviously his submission is bound to be a good one (given that he's rejected 99 others to use it).

If you go through the ABC3 Honour Roll  thread, the quality of the ABC3 winners easily compares to the quality of the SOTM winners. 
In the ABC3(S) and ABC3(T) comps there were twenty or so entrants (like a SOTM) AND the entries chosen didn't have the restriction of being written in one specific month, so both the S and T winners were classics. 

Also, as in SOTM, ABC3 entries are sometimes written especially for a letter coming up (I did that with my Q entry, and am doing one for the Z round) so that competitive aspect of the writing also boosts the quality of the parody.




I'm not sure where "ABC" got the image of a less quality contest. . .I find it harder to compete in than SOTM, in fact, my Squinting in the Dark is one of my best written parodies of all time, and it did so poorly for what I expected that I've sat out ABC in hopes to be more prolific a writer by the next ABC set (ABC4 as I presume it will happen), and I think that Artistry (just judging from how many have already entered round 1 with three days to go) is going to be the same way. . .however I think that many contests that are hosted by individuals here give you a chance to really get your name out.  I can't believe only 9 people entered the Ages contest, and about the same entered Decatholon, if I was around when that started I would have entered it before any SOTM or ABC. . .why. . .those contests really give me a chance to get noticed.  You get challenged, you can't enter just anything, it really gives you a chance to test yourself, and you become close nit with the other entrants as you keep reading work by the same people and they keep reading yours. . .it's kinda like having personal time with the entrants in the contest.  I'm sure after Ages ends, someone else will start something.  And now and then people post these small fun theme parodies like Red Ant and his "Gross-Out Deux" which allowed those who've written nasty parodies that tend to bomb in SOTM or ABC a chance to shine, that was my first medal. . .since then I've gotten several other medals (although not in SOTM or ABC, people seem less receptive of my work in those particular contests), try your hand at some of the smaller contests, I've found they are a good way to get your work out there.  It was that and the SOTM Wild Card that broke my non-existant streak. . .Ages has gotten me several potium finished, and I've gotten a great deal of appreciation for the other artists in there like Cat and Matthias who I only barely knew before that contest.  I also have come to really really really appreciate the opinions of Agimorefee, and have come to understand Tomario, his writings make sense after you read enough--some are actually quite good-and he is under-rated.  Wolverine, a newbie, is making some waves there to, and Michael McVey, Conqueror, and Jack Wilson--we are like a little family in there.  Sorry, going on, but small contests aren't necessairly a bad thing, try it sometime.

I agree with the point that SOTM is the premier comp, because it's current and shows off the latest work, so it's keenly contested.  Also, because the the ABCs often have fewer entries, they are less prestigious to win than SOTM.

But I disagree that the ABC's have lesser quality parodies.  IMO they usually have better quality parodies, because there are usually more to choose from, and tend to be from established authors. 


I should rephrase what I wrote earlier: I know that my own ABC entries, generally, are not as good as what I submit for SOTM. Most of that has to do with how many parodies I wrote when I was a newbie, and thus still learning the ropes. Indeed, ABCs can be harder than SOTM - I medaled in my 3rd or 4th SOTM comp, yet it took me nearly 20 consecutive entries into the ABCs to do the same.

The ABCs are by no means "intermediate" in quality - that was more of an observation that certain high-caliber authors who routinely entered SOTM sat out the ABCs (Spaff, Claude, Phil, etc.), giving a *bit* more of a chance to some up and coming authors (as well as veterans alike) to place, which is what I think Jason is really looking for.

It's all fair game in SOTM, unless Spaff enters (and he hasn't for quite some time).  ;D

that was more of an observation that certain high-caliber authors who routinely entered SOTM sat out the ABCs (Spaff, Claude, Phil, etc.), giving a *bit* more of a chance to some up and coming authors...



good point