You're right about that, Max. Early in the year, the NS would publish a list of the previous year's top 20 winners. The editor once told me that it was fine to submit pseudonymous entries, but my ranking for the year would be based only on wins under my own name. Weeks when I sent in more than one winning entry and thus appeared under more than one name were relatively rare, so I doubt that rule did me much harm. Basil Ransome-Davies, I believe, has been doing double entries every week (or every month) for a long time, so his one nom (well, the only one I'm aware of) has seen a lot more action than any of my half dozen or so. He might be the only frequent flyer seriously skewing your stats. I've had only one pseudonymous win so far this year (in comp #3037, I was also Francis Harry), I'm pretty sure Brian Allgar has had at least one, and without even looking up the exact numbers I say with confidence that Bazza has outstripped both of us. It was not unusual for him to appear twice on the Top 20 list, so he might well account for two of your Top 10 names.

Best of luck for your continuing success in the second half of 2018.

Max,

If you're only entering one entry per comp then I'd say generate a ranking on names, not pseudonyms. The playing field isn't level if you're sending in one entry and someone else is sending in three or four.

Matt

But if Max sends in two entries of which one wins, and someone else (let's call him Bazza) sends in two, both of which win, one of them pseudonymously, then Max won't really know how he's doing if he only counts the first one.

This, however, is only relevant if Max is competing against named individuals. I think my Quaker worldview is skewing my interpretation of this thread. I shall return to my solitary chip carving.

Thanks for the good wishes, Chris. I remember your welcome after my first Speccie win. Your friendliness and that of others has gone a long way toward helping me feel like a part of this club whose members I admire. I suppose wanting to feel my membership more firmly was a large reason for resolving to compete more regularly, at least for a year, and to measure my success against that of others. How much of my gentlemanly reserve about the comps was a cover for fear of failure? How regularly could I catch Lucy's and Tessa's fancies if I really tried?

Thanks also for sharing your pseudonym, and congratulations on that double win!

I occasionally send in multiple entries. I'm the rarely successful competitor Noam D. Plum (a pseudonym I used to use in Light Quarterly and elsewhere). Recently, I've avoided sending multiple entries, not searching for a second approach once I find one I like. Among the things I've noticed as I pay more attention to stats is that, in 2018 at least, I'm more successful in weeks when I send only one entry. Do I not polish entries as well as I think I'm polishing them when there is more than one to polish? Is Lucy annoyed with me for sending more than one? On the other hand, my one 2018 win in a comp for which I sent in more than one was for an entry I wouldn't have sent if I'd restricted myself to the one I thought the best, so...

Max, when I have sent in more than one entry it has often happened that the one that caught Lucy's eye was not the one that I thought the best. (This is also true of my entries in the Style Invitational.) This may be simply a difference of opinion, or sometimes may be because my own best wasn't quite as good as someone else's poem on a similar subject.

But now that your membership has been firmly established here, you can just have fun with it.

I think it's always been the case for Speccie/Staggers &c. that when I've sent more than one, it's the one I think is worse that gets chosen (if any).

Good luck with your challenge, Max. I find a degree of competition a spur to writing, and miss the Staggers' rankings. I share your thoughts on the encouragement of the more experienced compers here, I've found it very helpful.

I never liked the rankings as I like to think of each competition as separate rather than as individual points in a year long contest.

Dunno whether this conversation has run its course, but I want to thank everyone who's chimed in. I'm glad not everyone here thinks my goal is waste of time, and I'm glad that those who do have been willing to say so.

I intend to let you know in seven months whether I hit my target, because that intention may be helpful when I'm struggling with a comp--as I am this week.

Before this conversation closes, can someone explain the logistics of submitting under names other than one's own. Not that I submit much these days, and rarely had more than one entry to submit when I did.

I mean, I can easily set up an email address with another name, but setting up a bank account in that name is a challenge. I guess I could find a friend who doesn't mind their name and account details being used -- which is what I thought people were doing. But now I wonder if all that subterfuge would be necessary? I mean, if Max can get away with using "Noam D. Plume", presumably the comp setters aren't that bothered? On the other hand, I seem to recall someone once saying that they'd sent in fake name entry and saying it was such (or possibly sent the real and the fake in the same email?) and the Speccie being rather unhappy at the presumption of it.

thanks,

Matt