Third, the judging criteria seems fairly counterproductive in my opinion. A map should be judged on 2 main things, fun (gameplay) and aesthetics - with fun being weighted significantly more IMO. Now, you can break that down however you'd like and fun would incorporate balance and gameflow and aesthetics would incorporate detailing and style, but the "fun factor" isn't really represented in the criteria. Seems like a person should be able to go say map A is better than map B, but with the current criteria, B may easily end up with more points even if everybody thinks A is a much better map.
Fun is a factor emergent from good design. Aesthetics is not only about beauty but also about beauty in design. You can have a water tunnel solve a problem in a map, but figuring out a unique, integrated pathway that accomplishes the same issue requires much more expertise both in planning and in execution.
If the map is well detailed, optimized and balanced, gameplay will run smoothly and players will shine. If the aesthetics and style match that of TF2, your players will have even more fun.
If you think that you can design a map to be fun without having the expertise to detail it, then I shall meet thee on the battlefield in this contest to prove thee wrong.
And when it comes down to it, the popular vote wins it all. People place votes based on their experiences. If you don't balance it to be pleasurable for players of all playtypes and class choices, they won't have fun. But if it's reached that mark, and then on top of it they realize how pretty your map is, that's what pushes you into the victor's arena.
Having partly designed the system, I am biased towards its protection. But in the end, it will be your own work and skills that are judged by your peers, not by the rules themselves.
Put forth your best effort, address the design criteria, and have a fair fight
