\subsection{Organisation}

In 2007, the community decided to move from yearly competitions
to ``ongoing'' competitions. 
The goal  was to have more flexibility:
it should be easier to update provers
and show their results.

Yet, viewing all visible executions of provers
on data base problems as competitions, 
creates management overhead:
all decisions have to be approved by the competition committee.
This slowed down the process, and that is the reason
why ``ongoing'' competitions did not really happen.

This will be improved by the planned separation 
of the Competition from the Execution service.
This is modelled after the Lib/Exec/Comp structure
in the SMT (satisfiability modulo theory) community.

Then indeed the run time of the competition could be reduced,
by restricting to certain benchmarks of problems.
The competition then could be run during some conference,
with results being announced at the end, increasing visibility.
The ranking of participants (as applied in the Complexity category)
could add more excitement.
Runs over the full data base could still be done
at different times.

To implement such changes, 
the competition steering committee needs to act
much more efficiently than it does presently.

