Assessments in contests are frequently assumed to be complex when simple explanations will suffice

•We respond to a critique by Fawcett & Mowles of our recent essay about animal contests.•Much of the critique agrees with our original essay despite attempting to disagree.•However, our presentation of the original sequential assessment model was not correct.•It was subsequent interpretations of SAM that presumed cognitively complex processes.•We still urge caution in using complex explanations when simple explanations will suffice.