IRON DM 2021 Tournament

[Radiating Gnome]

Clearly I need to get back into the lists and out of the judging seats. Next time around, perhaps.

-rg

 

[FitzTheRuke]

No that seems right.

I was only listing those with at least three third round attempts. There are quite a few more who have had only one or two bites at the apple.

Spoiler: The full list as I have it

• Deuce Traveler - 3 and 1
• Wicht - 2 and 3
• Iron Sky - 2 and 2
• Gradine - 2 and 1
• Mortal Plague - 2 and 0
• Seasong - 1 and 2
• Nemm - 1 and 2
• Rune - 1 and 2
• Wulf - 1 and 1
• Quickbeam - 1 and 1
• Wayland - 1 and 1
• Radiating Gnome - 0 and 2
• 1 and 0 - Enkhidu, Tinner, Ajanders, Zappo
• 0 and 1 - Zenid, CareDavid, Stormborn, Invinoveritas

Didn't I lose round 3 in the only one I've been in?

 

[Rune]

Didn't I lose round 3 in the only one I've been in?

Last year, right?

 

[Wicht]

Didn't I lose round 3 in the only one I've been in?

Yep - I seemed not to have added either you or Humble Minion to the final list from last years contest.

Fixing.

 

[Wicht]

Thanks for the extra eyes. My actual saved file has each final round noted with each contestant and the winner bolded. I then went down and just tallied up the various names. Its easy to overlook someone in the tally, but the first part being done makes double checking of the tallies easy enough to do.

Also not on the list is Vaxalon who won in 2001 and then rather than compete in each contest simply challenged the winner. It was determined that this was not really completely fair as each champion had to produce three consistent entries before then producing the fourth and Vaxalon was only doing the one each time. But he did have a string of steady defenses of his overall title and if I was doing a more thorough presentation would probably asterick him in somehow.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Thanks for the extra eyes. My actual saved file has each final round noted with each contestant and the winner bolded. I then went down and just tallied up the various names. Its easy to overlook someone in the tally, but the first part being done makes double checking of the tallies easy enough to do.

Also not on the list is Vaxalon who won in 2001 and then rather than compete in each contest simply challenged the winner. It was determined that this was not really completely fair as each champion had to produce three consistent entries before then producing the fourth and Vaxalon was only doing the one each time. But he did have a string of steady defenses of his overall title and if I was doing a more thorough presentation would probably asterick him in somehow.

Yeah, I would think that would be a bit unfair. There's no reason to believe that anyone who lost round one this time (for example) wouldn't have turned in a winning round three, had they made it that far!

 

[Rune]

Yeah, I would think that would be a bit unfair. There's no reason to believe that anyone who lost round one this time (for example) wouldn't have turned in a winning round three, had they made it that far!

Speaking as one of the two people who have lost to Vaxalon in such a match (before he retired with the only undefeated record in IRON DM history), I wouldn’t exactly say the experience was unfair; I agreed to do it, after all. Not unfair – as an exhibition match.

But I was drained by the time I began that fourth match. The tournaments were pretty quick in those days and I was young enough to pull all-nighters when I needed to write, so that’s what three of my nights pretty recently had been. Not including any all-nighters I might have also pulled for class papers (can’t remember).

To be clear, Vaxalon’s work was legitemate and good (seriously, check out the surviving ones!). But there is no question in my mind that my own final entry was all the more strained as a result of my fatigue. I felt it then and I can still see it now when I reread it.

I think Incognito is the one who recognized that a better form of recognition would be automatic entry in the next tourney (they filled up very quickly back then).

I carried it over into the tournament my first time as a judge and it seems to be one innovation that has weathered the test of time.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Speaking as one of the two people who have lost to Vaxalon in such a match (before he retired with the only undefeated record in IRON DM history), I wouldn’t exactly say the experience was unfair; I agreed to do it, after all. Not unfair – as an exhibition match.

But I was drained by the time I began that fourth match. The tournaments were pretty quick in those days and I was young enough to pull all-nighters when I needed to write, so that’s what three of my nights pretty recently had been. Not including any all-nighters I might have also pulled for class papers (can’t remember).

To be clear, Vaxalon’s work was legitemate and good (seriously, check out the surviving ones!). But there is no question in my mind that my own final entry was all the more strained as a result of my fatigue. I felt it then and I can still see it now when I reread it.

I think Incognito is the one who recognized that a better form of recognition would be automatic entry in the next tourney (they filled up very quickly back then).

I carried it over into the tournament my first time as a judge and it seems to be one innovation that has weathered the test of time.

Yeah, I don't really mean criminally unfair. I would have done it, but slightly less meaningful than a current victory. I'm sure they were good enough to win regularly! (But may not have won so many in a row, as they would have had to have won three times as many matches, any of which could have held a stumper of an ingredient, a bit that didn't jive with the judges, or so idea that just didn't fit the word count or time limit to be polished).

 

[Rune]

Yeah, I don't really mean criminally unfair. I would have done it, but slightly less meaningful than a current victory. I'm sure they were good enough to win regularly! (But may not have won so many in a row, as they would have had to have won three times as many matches, any of which could have held a stumper of an ingredient, a bit that didn't jive with the judges, or so idea that just didn't fit the word count or time limit to be polished).

There is that, too. Back then it was just the one judge, even: @el-remmen.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

There is that, too. Back then it was just the one judge, even: @el-remmen.

Oh right! And I hear that was brutal!

 

[Iron Sky]

Oh right! And I hear that was brutal!

My god... I think by the second round I wouldn't have to fake Evil Judge anymore. My judgments generally take me 2-5 hours depending on the round so I can imagine soloing an entire tournament. Mad props @el-remmen!

Coming from @el-remmen, I’d take it as a burn on @Wicht. Coming from Wicht, I’d take it as a burn on el-remmen.

Coming from me, I would just be stirring the pot.

Coming from @Iron Sky, it’s probably just a coincidence.

Indeed, coincidence in the form of stretching a metaphor. Maybe it's just the Asperger's talking, but I still don't get why it's a burn?

 

[Wicht]

but I still don't get why it's a burn?

I will tell you a tale...

In the distant times, in the forgotten times that are not recorded, when Eric Noah still roamed the realms, and the boards were young and men were under the oversight of a one-legged-cat... in those days there was announced a tournament. The challengers assembled themselves for combat and were grouped. Warily they faced off against each other and there were ingredients given to them.

In one competition, the competition which is still remembered when all else is forgotten from those long-ago times, three of the ingredients given in a certain round included a ghost, a dryad, and a mast. In that round, one of the contestants deftly combined the three ingredients to craft a tale focused on the ghost of a dryad which was haunting the mast made from her tree. When the onlookers saw this offering, they were stunned and awed. The opponent quaked, fearing his time had been cut short in the games. Here, said everyone, was a masterful bit of word-work. Surely, here was a winning performance. But it was not to be. The judge was hard and as he surveyed the arena, he awarded the victory to the opponent, casting aside the dryad-haunted-ship-mast. There was an uproar. Who was this judge? How could he so render a judgment? With his head bowed, the vanquished-one waved the crowd to silence and accepted the verdict. Mostly gracefully. Only every now and then complaining that he was robbed. After all, the word of the Judge was Law, and could not be gainsayed. But still, many had doubts, and wondered whether the judge was right.

When next the tournament was called, that contest was still remembered, still talked about. The judgment still in question. And so it continues thus to this day. As the years unfold, here is the one tale from the beginning of Iron DM still remembered and still told. Let it stand as both a lesson and a warning... to all who would enter or judge IRON DM.

 

[Wicht]

There have been a few changes to Iron DM over the years... More structure demanded of the entries... More time... No more 12 entry matches. ...That sort of thing.

One of the most significant adaptations, significant for the mental health of the Judge, is using a three judge panel for the second and third rounds. Whether the judges are all unanimous or are divided on their judgment, it allows the participants to get a better feel for how others see and rank their work and also mitigates the likelihood of a disgruntled fan-base.

 

[humble minion]

Congratulations @Gradine - I haven't had time to read the final entries yet, but i caved in and spoiled myself on the last bit of the final judgements. Iron DM is not an easy thing to do, and I think it probably gets harder as years go by as a higher and higher proportion of entrants are grizzled veterans or ex-champions. You really can't make any mistakes against that level of competition.

Kudos to everyone, thanks to the judges, and I'll see you next year...

 

[Gradine]

To be fair, I'm not that many years from being a fresh-faced newbie myself; several of these vets were competing over a decade before my first entry. This is, what, my sixth year competing?

And, these last two years, and especially this year, you lot of newcomers have hit the ground running. Certainly faster than I did. I standby what I said earlier... run this competition eight times, same ingredients, same adventures, just mix up the 1st round judges, and you could very well end up with eight different outcomes.

I think the competition is only going to get to harder each year, both from the vets and the newbies (and as the newbies become vets in their own right). It's not for nothing that in the now 22 tournaments we have on record, the returning champion has successfully defended their title in a full tournament all of once.

I mean, at least until next year anyway...

 

[Iron Sky]

Congrats to @Gradine and all the other competitors for an impressive tournament. Adopted persona not withstanding, I was really impressed with the quality of entries starting from the very get. Learned quite a bit and, with a bit of perspective, wanted to apologize if the way I exaggeratedly attacked some of your entries was too much. I really do get how much effort goes into these and how hard it is to take criticism for work you threw everything you had into.

I think in future judging I'll let the participants decide if they want (relatively) well adjusted judge or bombastic jerkwad evil judge before hand. That said, I'm planning on competing next year and hoping some of what I learned from you all sticks!

 

[Neurotic]

Evil judge definitely

Congratulations @Gradine! Well deserved!

 

[Rune]

Congrats to @Gradine and all the other competitors for an impressive tournament. Adopted persona not withstanding, I was really impressed with the quality of entries starting from the very get. Learned quite a bit and, with a bit of perspective, wanted to apologize if the way I exaggeratedly attacked some of your entries was too much. I really do get how much effort goes into these and how hard it is to take criticism for work you threw everything you had into.

I think in future judging I'll let the participants decide if they want (relatively) well adjusted judge or bombastic jerkwad evil judge before hand. That said, I'm planning on competing next year and hoping some of what I learned from you all sticks!

I think, if I were the contestant (and, who knows – maybe I will be next year?), I’d prefer an honestly-presented critical assessment over one filtered through an entertaining persona. On the one hand, the obviously over-the-top presentation makes it harder to take personally, which isn’t a bad thing.

But the entertainment angle, ultimately, serves the audience more than the contestant, I think. Which is also not a bad thing, but as a contestant, I’m looking at the judgements to learn from them. The persona is necessarily going to get in the way of that (to some degree) because even the truths it tells are exaggerated.

But I don’t feel all that strongly about it, either. I do think both goals are probably achievable for a judge who keeps them in mind.

 

[Wicht]

I don't mind angry judge but it did make it harder to tell which criticisms to take as seriously. I could also see a newbie getting burnt out faster if the first and only critique of their work was over the top harsh.

 

[Iron Sky]

I don't mind angry judge but it did make it harder to tell which criticisms to take as seriously. I could also see a newbie getting burnt out faster if the first and only critique of their work was over the top harsh.

That was my concern. I figured you guys were all veteran enough to handle the criticism. Definitely going to make it opt-in for the contestants whenever I judge in the future.