when are we going to have a

[wolf_bluejay]

I have seen a few serious competitions where points are awarded for different things and the "total" is what wins at the end of the day.

So instead of having a budget limit, frag limit, etc.
What about 0-10 points being awarded for each of "budget, aquascape, coral/livestock, equipment design and originality".

That way, if you spend more, you might get nice colonies, but you'll lose points for being more expensive. This way you would get a balance between how nice a tank looks, and the expense for it. It seems most of the debate on the budget stuff is about bang-for-buck. This way everyone gets to play. I would rather attempt to do a tank for a few hundred and see how much/nice I can get it. But, I don't want to go head to head with someone that just blew $3000 on a 33 gal tank. Of course it will look better. I think the contest should partially about "bank-for-buck", but spend whatever you want.

With that being said, my artistic talent are horrible. And I think it should only be fair that those that have an imagination get "points" for it as well.

There, that is my "morning, and coffee hasn't kicked in yet" rant

[sphelps]

I like the point system idea. I would add to it by suggesting points are awarded for different categories by different groups of 3 or 4 judges. Each group of judges gets assigned one category and awards points to each contender based on the criteria that particular group of judges agree upon. Judges would remain anonymous until the end of the contest.

[Trigger Man]

Ya a point system in multiple catagories would seem fair, I was thinking something like having the most expensive tank be worth the least amount of points for the expense budget and the least expensive tank being worth the most points in the expense budget. Then all the other tanks would get points based on where their costs fit inbetween the two tanks.

[sphelps]

Originally Posted by Trigger Man

I was thinking something like having the most expensive tank be worth the least amount of points for the expense budget and the least expensive tank being worth the most points in the expense budget. Then all the other tanks would get points based on where their costs fit inbetween the two tanks.

Yeap but I think the judges of that particular category should have the final say on how points are distributed. It may be more involved, one contenders budget may be lower due to location among other factors.

[wolf_bluejay]

Originally Posted by sphelps

Yeap but I think the judges of that particular category should have the final say on how points are distributed. It may be more involved, one contenders budget may be lower due to location among other factors.

I think that the regional difference in price isn't going to matter much in the end. With a point's approach and no limits on the budget, honesty is only "mostly" needed in the list price. Heck, if nobody would want to post costs, they won't have too. Anyone that is a judge would know that you didn't get a 250watt halide setup for $10. And they would award points based on that.

For example, I have a 600 gph pump from my old 90 Gal, that I don't even know who makes it, let alone what it is worth. I can use it, put down a guess at it's value and carry on. Same for the leftover crushed coral, frags that I have etc.


The final budget goes from a challenge to get in budget, and more of a list that says "You could build this tank for $XXX" . With that said, you would list what it would cost someone to obtain or buy new the parts, rather than what you paid for it. This means that stuff that we ALL have laying around doesn't need to be included (screws, pcv solvent, glue, bit of glass or plexi) or stuff that you can salvage for free or would already have normally.

I personally would be more of a -- you could copy my design and I think it would cost you $XXX, and it really cost me $YYY because of freebies, frags or spare parts. And if I lie REALLY BAD, any one here would know better, and probably strike points away for the REALLY BAD LIE!

With points, you get away from any silly technicalities, and rely on the common sense of the judges. Almost no rules, just fun!

As for prizes -- As I already have a tank that drives my wife nuts(210gal), so I *might* do this for the fun of it -- and then offload the tank and such. So most of my tank would be made of frags from my existing tank. so, what about if a few people offered the coral from the tanks (If you are shutting it down) as a prize/entry fee?

[StirCrazy]

I actualy like the points idea, the fun part will be figureing out the catagories and how many points for each.

I also like the idea of having two prices, what you actualy paid (freebies are free) and then a running total of what it would have cost new. that way if a newbe liked the design and set up he would know how much it would cost to duplacate it.

Oh about the no water for 6 months, it should have read no water required for 6 months, so you had a max of 6 months to get water in your tank. that would give people time to realy think about what they want to do and work on getting there.

Steve

[moldrik]

I just wanted to point out, that:

A) I haven't been in a contest, and I probably never will.
B) From the sounds of it, and I have seen it, stores in Vancouver alone fluctuate a lot in price ( go compare J&L vs. Aquariums West ). If you go to the interior, or even more, somewhere in manitoba, your stuff is going to cost you more, 100% guaranteed, so having a flexible system for money ( such as the point system ) makes things a bit more fair.
C) Make the focus again, less on value, and more on creative things such as: aquascaping, flora/fauna combinations, hardware setups.

From what it sounds like, the majority of arguments come from discussions associated with budgets. If the focus is changed from this being the key element that drives the contest, we'll be seeing far more interesting results.
________
mexico city hotels