[IRON DM] Winter '04 Tournament (IRON DM ANNOUNCED!)

[Wulf Ratbane]

While I'm absolutely delighted to have won, my delight is tempered by Wulf's assertion that the quality of the judgment was poor.

The quality of the judgement was poor, not because of the result, but because the judge did not follow the usual criteria. I could have accepted an ingredient by ingredient rundown and loss. We did not see that.

Here's the essence of what we got as a judgement:

The Iron Chefs are presented with their mystery ingredient: Octopus.

Chef A creates a dish from the octopus. It is not the most flavorful of dishes (it is, after all, made of octopus).

Chef B creates roast duck-- with a plate of octopus for dessert.

"Fantastic!" says the judge. "I happen to love roast duck! You win!"

We have frequently seen a complaint from the judge when the ingredient is used in a way that could be replaced by some other ingredient.

Your wig could have been a hat of disguise. It could have been a wand of polymorph. How the nymph came by a magic wig is not addressed, nor is it important that it be a wig.

Perhaps not a tarrasque (that is a straw man), but your will o wisps could have been ogres. Could have been kobolds. Better yet, could have been sympathetic nymphs. No explanation was given for how or why the will o wisps would ally themselves with the hag. On the other hand, my wisp was a direct extension of Loviatar's curse.

These kinds of problems are usually noted by the judge. I don't think he did that in his entry.

You and I may disagree, but we can both agree on one thing-- in our brief expositions, we have both done a better job of assessing the ingredients than the judgement we received.

Frankly, if I had received the judgement I got from you in your reply, I'd be fine. I have lost plenty of times before, you know.

Again, it is not the loss-- it is the fact that the judge overlooked his usual judging criteria to award the entry he thought was "tastier."

Wulf

 

[cstyle]

Semi-Final Round - Third Match-Up: Wulf Ratbane vs. CarpeDavid

I've gotta agree with Wulf on this one. I don't like the judgement or the results.

Concerning the results, I thought Wulf hands down had the better entry. His ingrediant use was clearly superior, and he didn't leave half the unanwered questions that CD did. Plus, I felt his story was more compelling. There were aspects of Wulf's entry that made CD's some what more playable, but to me, it wasn't even close. However, this is largely opinion, and opinions vary. If the judge doesn't see it like that, hey, it happens.

However, it appears that the judge did have the same opinion as me on several points! Nem did say he liked CD's story more, but then said that Wulf's ingrediant use was superior, and criticized CD for the many unanswered questions he left. In previous judgements, we are led to believe that good ingrediant use earned big points, and unanswered questions lost big points. Points for a more compelling story seemed to matter only if it was needed as a tie breaker. Which leads me to what I really don't like about the judgement: consistency. I can live with nem's opinion that CD has the better story. I could live with it if his opinion differed from mine on the ingrediant use. But inconsistency in judging is hard to swallow.

 

[el-remmen]

I considered re-writing the judgment to show in even more detail the reason behind my decision, but I decided against it as it is not a precedent I want to set - because then every time someone disagrees with my judgment I'll end up spending time writing one or more defenses of my outcome.

Though I have to admit I am disappointed in how contentious this tournament has been, and as I had grown used to people being more gracious losers. . .

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

However, it appears that the judge did have the same opinion as me on several points! Nem did say he liked CD's story more, but then said that Wulf's ingrediant use was superior, and criticized CD for the many unanswered questions he left. In previous judgements, we are led to believe that good ingrediant use earned big points, and unanswered questions lost big points. Points for a more compelling story seemed to matter only if it was needed as a tie breaker. Which leads me to what I really don't like about the judgement: consistency. I can live with nem's opinion that CD has the better story. I could live with it if his opinion differed from mine on the ingrediant use. But inconsistency in judging is hard to swallow.

Yep, that's basically it.

I'm not annoyed at a loss-- happens all the time. But when you lose, you expect to lose "by the rules," and (especially when you feel you have the better entry) you want to have the judgement explained to you so you understand the loss.

This judgement began with the comment that my entry showed "great and ingenious" use of the ingredients (an assessment I wholeheartedly agree with), and then went on to award the round to what the judge admitted was a weaker use of ingredients.

I open this question to the judge: What lesson are current and future competitors to take away from this judgement? (Let us hope the answer is not that the judge is a capricious arbiter and that's just the way it is...)

Can't wait to see the grief I get when it's my turn to judge... But I am eager to temper nemmerlesque criticism with Wulf-esque consistency.


Wulf

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I considered re-writing the judgment to show in even more detail the reason behind my decision, but I decided against it as it is not a precedent I want to set - because then every time someone disagrees with my judgment I'll end up spending time writing one or more defenses of my outcome.

Not a precedent you should set, I agree.

But I do have a follow up question for you (see last post).


Wulf

 

[el-remmen]

I open this question to the judge: What lesson are current and future competitors to take away from this judgement? (Let us hope the answer is not that the judge is a capricious arbiter and that's just the way it is...)

That even very clever use of individual ingredients will not necessarily win you the round if they are not bound together with a good story and/or thematic elements that is ALSO a fun adventure to play.

Though of course, even the most fun adventure in the world is not going to win if the ingredient use is weak overall.

And that is my final say on the matter.

 

[Quickbeam]

It's a shame that this installment of Iron DM has been somewhat less "enjoyable" than previous incarnations for everyone involved. Hopefully we can all move on in a manner that is acceptable and that manages to provide betterment for future tournaments.

BTW, have I mentioned that I'm winning again next time out ?

 

[Piratecat]

I agree. In future competitions, it might make sense that losers with frustrations or questions address the judge by email, not in the thread itself.

 

[el-remmen]

The Final Round Begins

Ok, so as I explained before, this is how it will work: Two of the finalists compete (in this case Enkhidu vs. CarpeDavid), the loser will then compete against the third finalist (Zenld). If the loser of the first match loses again he is eliminated, but either way then the third finalist would face off against the winner of the first match. The winner of two matches takes the whole thing.

If there is a three way tie, then the judge will go back and compare the use of the special tie-breaker ingredient. The tie-breaker ingredient can be used in either of your entries, but NOT BOTH, so choose wisely. Every one has the same tie-breaking ingredient.

The tie-breaking ingredient is: Celestial Wrestler

 

[el-remmen]

Final Round: First Match: Enkhidu vs. CarpeDavid


Final Round - First Match-Up: Enkhidu vs. CarpeDavid

Ingredients
-----------------
The Edge of the World
Elven Ship
Blood Moon
Tarrasque Eggs
Fire Newts
Despair

This is IRON DM territory, people. Look sharp!

You have 24 hours from the time stamp of this post.

Remember you 'ingredient review' at the end of your entry.
Remember, NO EDITING after you've posted.
Remember, NO READING your opponent's entry if he posts before you do.
Remember to include the the Round/Match and Opponent Info at the top of your entry (see above).

Good luck to both of you, and don't forget you may use the tie-breaking ingredient in this round if you like.