Q) How can I tell if a competition is genuine?

A) Two things to look for are longevity and reputation. Has the competition been running for many years? Do other writers mention it as being a good place to win? Longevity isn't always a sure sign, as many of the poetry anthologisers have been around for years. These are competitions that offer anthologies to 'winners' at a cost of anything up to £50. Another thing you might want to ask of a competition is whether the prizes are genuine prizes. I recently refused to list a competition on my website because the supplementary prizes were small rebates on writing holidays which meant 'winners' had to spend several hundred pounds in order to claim their 'prize'. Johnathon Clifford's website gives information on the poetry anthologisers. You can also check out Preditors and Editors. But nothing beats word of mouth from other writers, so browse writing forums online or join a writing group.

Q) Can you tell us how competitions are judged - does the judge read every entry?

A) There's no definitive answer to this. Much depends on the competition, re the size of the organisation and the money and resources available. Some comps are small scale, with the organisers doing their own reading and judging. Some competitions, like Bridport, do have readers, who work through the entries, and help draw up a shortlist, which then goes to the guest judge. The readers are people involved with the organisation, and trusted to know what sort of standard to send through. 

Q) If I'm writing for a themed competition, how do I make my entry stand out?

A) One thing I do is make a spider gram - or mind map - with the theme in the centre. Then I brainstorm for ten minutes, writing down everything that the theme suggests to me. I nearly always reject the first three or four, because they're the ones that the majority of entrants will use. Think laterally rather than literally. If the theme is love, it doesn't have to be a traditional boy-meets-girl romance. I once wrote a story about someone falling in love with her own reflection in the mirror, and there was a documentary on recently about men who were romantically in love with their cars which would be good inspiration for a story. The connections you can make to one theme are endless, and a slightly quirky take on that theme will get the judges' attention. Above all be original and write well.

Q) I read recently that some competition judges consider it amateurish to put 'The End' at the bottom of your story, and that it might even harm your chances of winning. Is this true?

A) This is one of those 'rules' that has found credence through being spread on Internet writing forums and as such, should be approached with caution. It may be true that some competition judges believe it's amateurish, but that doesn't make it a valid reason for failing to award a prize to an otherwise excellent story. It might even be necessary, if your story finishes near the bottom of a page; to make it clear it's ended and show there are no pages missing. If you're not certain, you could just put /end, which (apparently and arbitrarily) is not considered such a faux pas. As always check the competition rules and previous judge's comments, just in case it's a definite no-no.  

Q) I'm a new writer, and have never entered any competitions. Which competitions should I enter? I like the sound of the Bridport (because it has a big prize!) but would I be wasting my entrance fee there?

A) As last month's article showed, newer writers are just as capable of winning Bridport as well-established authors. It sometimes pays to be bold when it comes to entering writing competitions. However, it might be worth starting small and working your way up. Getting placed in a smaller competition can be a validation of your work, and proof that you're on the right track. It also helps you get into the habit of making your work competition 'ready', so that by the time you enter bigger comps, all the beginners' mistakes, which we all make, are ironed out.

From Aug 2009 - an Ask Sally Special, re-produced here in its entirety.

I'm often asked questions that require longer answers than I'm able to give in the space we have here. With that in mind, I thought it was time for an Ask Sally Special.

Let's start with the one question every writer asks. What makes the perfect competition winner?

It's the sixty-four-thousand dollar question, isn't it? If anyone knows the answer, they're keeping it to themselves. If I knew the answer, you'd be seeing my name in a lot more winners' lists.

The problem with the question is that it assumes there is such a thing as a perfect winner. There isn't, and writers are making things very hard for themselves in believing so. Putting it bluntly, the winning entry in any competition is seldom perfect. It just has fewer imperfections than all the other entries. Or is so entertaining that the imperfections don't matter. On the other hand, an entry may well be perfect technically, showing the writer's artistry to good affect. It may have no spelling or grammatical mistakes. It may sit nicely on the page. But it might also be sterile and dull. Or just not float that particular judge's boat.

I recently had a chat with a competition judge about the comp he's just overseen. He said that one story he'd marked low went on to win another competition, causing him some embarrassment. He told me, 'It's a good job I can laugh about it now.' But he also said it proves that just because a story fails in one competition, doesn't mean it won't do well in another. The story wasn't perfect for him, but it worked for a different judge.

I'm not an expert on poetry competitions, so I asked fellow WF columnist Sarah Willans, organiser of the Plough Prize, for her take on what makes the perfect poetry winner and the perfect poetry competition entrant:

"Does (the question) refer to the poem, the poet, or both? If it's the poem … it just needs to be a really good and original poem that engages and in some way moves the reader - and the judge has to like it better than all the other entries that also fit those criteria.

The perfect prizewinning poet reads a great deal of good, modern poetry, and is a perfectionist who seeks knowledgeable feedback on her work and constantly strives to improve it. She reads competition rules carefully and follows them to the letter, and realises that readers owe her nothing - it's up to her to make the poem work for as many of them as possible.

Although it won't affect her chances of winning, it's a bonus if she's polite to and considerate of the hard-working and often overlooked competition organisers - not just because they deserve it, but because they tend to be pretty well-connected in the poetry world and can sometimes help the career of a poet whose work they admire, even if they're not a winner. Networking is a vital skill for any aspiring poet."

I find it hard to come up with unique ideas? Do you think it's true that all stories are just re-cycled from something that's already been written?

 I don't know if I'd use the word recycled, as that suggests a conscious decision to copy what's gone before. It's subtler than that. I think we pick up the plots of stories by osmosis. By reading. By watching television. By observing the world around us.

 It is said that there are only seven basic short story plots. According to Christopher Booker in The Seven Basic Plots, (Continuum International Publishing Group Ltd 2005) they are:

 1) Overcoming the monster

2) Rags to riches

3) The quest

4) Voyage and return

5) Comedy

6) Tragedy

7) Rebirth

(Georges Polti claims there are 36, but there's no room to list those. You can find them here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thirty-Six_Dramatic_Situations).

Homer's epic Odyssey contains all of Booker's plots. So yes, they have been around for some time, and have been 'recycled' for countless novels, film and television, with each new generation concentrating on the plots as they apply to their own era.

There are only so many situations into which we can put human characters. When you write a story, or poem, you are usually writing about the human condition (we'll ignore the possibilities of science fiction and fantasy at the moment, although the best SF/F stories shine a light on humanity). You want your characters to inspire sympathy and empathy in people, or if not, at least some understanding as to their motivations. To do that, you'll probably choose themes that humans deal with in our lives; birth, love, joy, failure, heartbreak, death, to name but a few.

To add even more depth to your story, each of the listed plots can be combined with others, and can also be interpreted in any way you choose. Overcoming the monster doesn't have to mean fighting the Cyclops. It can mean a psychological battle over one's own fears and phobias.

The trick is to approach the seven plots in a way that's fresh and new. Easy when you know how…

I always see the same names on competition winners' lists. Is it even worth me bothering to enter?

At the moment, the only difference between those winners and you is that they've entered the competitions and, judging by your question, you haven't. As the lottery folks are so fond of telling us, 'You've got to be in it to win it.' Of course it's worth you bothering, otherwise you're always going to be seeing the same names.

It used to be that the same people seemed to win all the time, but I have noticed that different names are appearing on winners' lists. Part of this, I think, is that the information about writing competitions is more readily available. I can't take all the credit for that. Other writers are now happier about posting details on their blogs, and, I'm grateful to say, tipping me off when they hear of new competitions.

One downside is that competitions receive many more entries now, meaning it's even harder to get that win.

I prefer to see it as a positive thing. It means the judges have more good quality writing to choose from. And that win is a bit sweeter when you know you've been chosen from a large selection. It also gives a much-needed shot in the arm to the world of writing competitions.

If you're tired of seeing the same names on winners' lists, give them a run for their money by entering.

My writing tutor says that stories that win competitions tend to be more literary than stories accepted by mainstream magazines. Can you define 'literary' and do you think this is true?

No, I'm afraid I can't define literary for you (if anyone out there can, I'd love to hear it). I can tell you that literary is a term that's often used to denote stories that aren't of any particular genre (i.e. romance, crime, horror, sf, fantasy), and which deal with weightier themes, using elevated language. For some, literary means better writing, whilst genre writing and the stories found in popular magazines are sometimes seen as inferior writing (not by me, I hasten to add). But when you consider Booker Prize winner John Banville has diversified into writing crime, and recent International Mann Booker Prize winner Alice Munro has had her stories published in Woman's Weekly, it becomes obvious that the demarcation lines between literary and mainstream aren't that clear. At least not among the successful writers who refuse to be pigeon-holed.

Competition winning stories do tend to deal with deeper themes, such as death, war, loss. Stories in popular magazines are lighter in feel, with a happy ending, or at least some hope for the future. That's not to say that all competition stories are miserable, or that all magazine stories shirk from dealing with less pleasant themes. It helps to research a little. If you can, get a winners' anthology, or read past winners on websites. You'll see for yourself that few stories can be said to be entirely literary or entirely mainstream, as well as getting a good idea what that particular competition requires of its winners.

My belief is that competition judges, like most readers are only looking for good writing and a cracking story which entertains them, so concentrate on that rather than trying to fit into any of the boxes that people create.