Startup Competitions- Miss Congeniality Theory

On the circuit of startup competitions, a familiar formula plays itself out. A smattering of entrepreneur teams puts out 2- to 15-minute powerpoint pitches to a small all-star cast of VC's and a large cast of people-paid-to-be-there.

At the end of the affair, a winner-takes-all prize is awarded to the best presenter, usually selected by popular vote.

What's interesting about this system is that on top of the systemic shortcomings beauty pageants have (Nobody pays close attention, everyone is distracted, the time is too short to get an in-depth understanding of the project or the presenter, there's just way too many to choose between) many of the reviewers have little in the way of technical background to suss out snake oil versus the golden goose, or business background to sense who has a chance of making their whizbang predictions into reality and who couldn't sell booze to a drunk.

It's never as simple as "invest in the winner" to a deep-pocketed attendee at one of these events, but it occurs to me that if you had to pick a winner to receive the cash prize, there's a more disinterested and skilled set of voters- the other presenters.

If I was tasked with investing X in a single presenter at one of these events, I'd invest in Miss Congeniality, not Miss Pageant.

What does everyone else think?

On that note, an experiment: Why not set up a crowdsourced YC-like class along the same lines? You'd have to apply to vote, and you'd have to vote to apply. Applicants wouldn't have the same discerning skills of a YC, but they'd be able to screen chocolates from turds in a massively parallel capacity. It'd also save the staff a massive crush of application reviews.