Carvers should realize this contest is one of execution rather than interpretation. It is like the billiard contest of two years ago rather than the last year's cavalier contest.
This cannot be emphasized enough.
The alternating
"strict shape year" / "anything goes (within a theme) year" format came about because in the contest's early years carvers felt they had to do something outrageous to get noticed in a contest setting, regardless of the assigned shape, and so went after loopholes. The result was few---almost no---classics were entered. It was out of balance, in other words.
Not wanting subsequent contests to become lawyer-flavored, word-wrestling matches that resulted in multi-page rules sheets that read like contracts, it was decided to cover the full spectrum of pipe making in the course of TWO contests instead of one. Classic years, and No Design Limits (within a theme) years.
Meaning that yes, indeed, the author is a simple, basic shape, but placing in the winning set of seven will be anything BUT simple. The signal to noise ratio improves exponentially when doing basic, fundamental things, and the judges know it.
The best strategy I've heard for the 2016 contest is since the author is a popular, accessible shape that is easy to sell, make one every month for the next 10 months, playing "King of the Hill" as they're produced. If the latest one beats the current shop champion, list the loser. Rinse & repeat until contest time. You're not doing anything you wouldn't do in the course of a normal production year, your entry will be a cherry pick AND the result of significant shape-specific practice, and contest entry deadline pressure will simply cease to exist.
