Best Short Story Competitions

I just submitted to The Masters Review Flash Fiction contest last month—first place gets $3,000, which is solid for under 1,000 words. The caveat is their editorial taste leans toward crisp, literary prose with a twist; my more genre-bending piece got a polite pass last year. Another reliable one is the 'Saturday Evening Post' Great American Fiction Contest. It pays $500 for the winner and publication in a magazine my grandparents actually recognize, which is a weird flex but kind of charming. Not the hugest purse, but the prestige opens doors.

For pure cash, the BBC National Short Story Award is massive (like £15,000), but it's ultra-competitive and has specific eligibility around UK connection. I treat those as my annual 'reach' submissions. Honestly, don't sleep on genre-specific contests either—'Asimov's Readers' Award' or the Alfred Hitchcock's Mystery Magazine contest often have lower entry numbers and decent payouts if your story fits the mold. My strategy is mixing one 'dream' contest with a couple of mid-tier ones per season to balance hope and realism.

Man, I used to spend hours down this rabbit hole when I was trying to justify more writing time. The real heavy-hitters for pure cash are contests like the 'Writers of the Future', which tops out at $5000 for first place. They've got a huge sci-fi/fantasy focus, but they don't own your rights after, which is huge.

Then there are the genre-specific ones like the 'Soul-Making Keats' contest from the National League of American Pen Women—some categories have prizes up to $2500. These feel more like proper literary establishments. The catch is a lot of them have entry fees that can add up, so you've gotta weigh if the shot is worth the buy-in. I submitted to one a few years back that was $15 entry, prize was $1000, and got an honorable mention that felt better than the prize would have, honestly.

Be wary of contests that accept entries year-round with rolling deadlines. They can sometimes feel like a perpetual money-making machine rather than a curated event with a defined judging period. A clear open/close date and a promised announcement date are signs of good organization.

I prefer contests that only open for a month or two. It creates a sense of occasion and suggests all entries will be considered as a batch, judged against each other, not just against some abstract standard as they trickle in.

The potential for a nice, clean publication credit. Before you have a novel or a collection of published work, a short story credit from a reputable contest is a solid line on your writing CV. It’s an objective third party saying your work has merit.

When you later query agents or submit to magazines, that line shows you’re serious, you can finish pieces, and your writing has passed a judging panel. It’s a foundational building block for a writing career.

Sometimes the website itself is the clue. If the contest page is plastered with past winner testimonials gushing about the 'incredible, detailed feedback,' that's a good sign. If it only boasts about the prize money, be skeptical.

Testimonials are marketing, of course, but writers are a cynical bunch. If multiple people independently mention the quality of the notes, there's probably truth to it. We're not easily impressed by fluff.

Does anyone else get weirdly motivated by a specific deadline and prize? Like, I'll have a story half-finished for months, but the second I see a contest with a theme that sparks something and a deadline in six weeks, I become a writing machine.

Maybe it's the pressure. Maybe it's the dream of winning. But use that! Let competition prompts kick you out of writer's block. Even if you don't win, you've created a new piece you can submit elsewhere.

The judging criteria are sometimes published. Look for words like 'narrative voice,' 'emotional impact,' 'originality of concept,' and 'quality of prose.' Tailoring your story to hit those noted points can give you a strategic edge.

University literary magazine contests for students are a sure bet. If you're a student (undergrad or grad), submit to those. The editors are often MFA candidates who are deep in workshop culture and are encouraged to provide meaningful feedback, especially to fellow students. They see it as part of the literary community service. I got a full page of typed notes from a grad student editor on a story I submitted to a university journal's contest.

It was the most thorough, craft-focused critique I've ever received, full of references to narrative theory and close reading. Absolutely incredible.

Seeing the same writers win multiple contests can be disheartening, but it also teaches you about cycles. Those writers are often working on a professional schedule, constantly producing and submitting.

They're not just hitting one deadline; they're riding the wave of the entire annual contest calendar, with stories always in circulation. Observing that taught me that 'winning' isn't about one shot. It's about integrating the contest cycles into a sustained, ongoing practice. You're not just entering a contest; you're participating in a continuous cycle of creation and submission that lasts all year, every year.

Does the contest have a history of winners going on to big careers? That's the ultimate meta-prize. Winning a contest that has launched previous winners into successful publication is a prize that includes momentum and industry attention. The structure of past success becomes part of the present prize's allure. It's a track record bonus.