enough about conflict of interest, let's see some APSE results!

I hear Pos is pretty good.

 

I acknowledge that I'm completely ignorant about the process and the voting, so I'm probably far from qualified to discuss this. But as a fairly regular reader of both sections, it would be hard for me to understand -- as a reader -- how Orlando tops St. Pete in a contest of best sports sections. Maybe the graphics and layout are better? I'm not a good judge of that. It's not really my thing. But as a reader, I'd have a tough time believing there's 20 better sections in the country than St. Pete. Just MHO.

 

Wait, did you get this on the record? Or off the record?

 

Glad to see Mike Wise as one of the WaPo's columnist winners. I enjoy his writing.

On a personal note, I've enjoyed the fact that he's joked around with me once or twice ... and he's even called me by name.

 

I don't like opinion-filled, column pieces submitted as "gamers" being recognized. But perhaps that is just me.

 

Not sure how this year worked but some of it can be bad luck -- having a blah day on the mandatory judging days.

 

Two things.... a section only has to be better than another on its two best days of the year and two randomly selected dates.

And, Hoppes is a political Tyrannosaur.

 

I don't believe in contests in our business. For 101 reasons (Nos. 1-8 were the years I didn't win before I stopped entering completely). ;D

That said, it can't be a good thing that not one writer in Chicago reached the top 10 in any category. That's underachieving on a grand scale, though I know both papers are in crisis mode (Sun-Times' disappearing stock value, Tribune's Zell hell).

 

"That said, it can't be a good thing that not one writer in Chicago reached the top 10 in any category. That's underachieving on a grand scale, though I know both papers are in crisis mode (Sun-Times' disappearing stock value, Tribune's Zell hell)."

According to APSE handouts the last four or five years, the talent is in the suburbs....

 

I wouldn't go so far as to say that writers in Chicago are underachieving because a group-think didn't deem them worthy of an award.

 

They underachieve in general, though.

 

If there's facts you can back that up with then I don't object, I just don't think it's accurate to use the APSE results to declare some person/section overachieving or underachieving unless you're reading it day after day.