The expo was pretty awful, as a presenter. After being up for >30 hours working on the project, having to stand up and pitch it for two hours was rough. It also meant not getting to go around and see everybody else's projects.

If they do this again, they should shorten the expo significantly and do it in stages, so that nobody has to stand and talk for two hours.

I thought the expo format was alright but it would've been better if there was a larger space so some teams didn't have to be outside and people didn't have to shout over each other while trying to discuss their projects. It was a better format for larger teams though, as everyone could take turns presenting and looking at other projects.

I've been to a dozen large hackathons and they essentially all operate in this manner. I've been trying to come up with another way - the expo style has many shortcomings including those you listed. It's very hard to stand out in this format especially if your demo is not conducive to 10 seconds standing up at a table with 100db ambient volume. Makes the importance of designing a hackathon-friendly hack paramount.

The expo definitely has it's tradeoffs, but I've been to dozens of hackathons now, and before we switched to the expo, the endings were significantly lower energy: https://medium.com/how-to-throw-a-hackathon/635563ceab2f

Expo definitely favors larger teams as we only allow one person to demo from each team at a time, leaving the team members to swap out and check out all the other hacks. While the demos in front of everyone may be more fair, the expo builds community and gives people the opportunity to get immediate feedback on their pitch/product even if they dont win a prize or make it to the final round.

You should've seen the energy in the room.

PennApps, LAHacks, HackTech, HackSC...all had expos. You're right in that demos for everyone just aren't feasible. But I think you understate the challenges and downsides associated with expos.

The hackathon explosion is just getting started, I'm sure things will continue to improve as these events mature.

LAUNCH had teams assigned to one of 15 groups of judges and you pitched them and the winners from each group of judges made it forward to the next round which meant one 3-5 minute pitch only. The downside was that you didn't get to see most of what everyone else built.

I agree with you, esp since it seems you were a solo presenter. It is good to have at least one teammate if you can find, because again, the statistics do not favor lone founders.