Via Fight Aging!, here's a well-thought-out analysis from George Dvorsky on what the SENS Challenge might mean for the future of aging research:

So, my pre-interpretation of the judge’s decision should they vote against SENS is that they will likely take issue with the inner working of SENS and de Grey’s methodology. And as I said, on this point they may be right – an outcome that may cause de Grey to go back to the drawing board to come up with SENS 2.0. If they declare, however, that speculations into anti-aging interventions per se are “beyond learned debate,” then they will have made a significant judgemental error.

If, on the other hand, the judges vote in favour of SENS, it would represent a clear victory for those who continually push the boundaries of science into uncharted and controversial areas. It’s artist as scientist, drawing outside the lines to conceive of new possibilities and charting all the terra incognita. Perhaps this is why de Grey is happy with the current set of judges; like himself, the panel is filled with visionaries and big thinkers.

Frankly, I don't see how Aubrey can lose. Unless the panel of judges buys into the "de Grey is a fraud and SENS is pseudo-science" tirade, -- which seems highly unlikely -- he will have gained some valuable serious criticism of his work and additional exposure for his ideas.

Ideas which, by the way, we've been exposing for some time.